• ABOUT ASCI
  • COMPLAINTS
  • CONSUMER
  • INDUSTRY
  • ASCI UPDATES
  • CONTACT US
Advertising with a Conscience
 

Select Month :

 
ASCI Recommendations
 

COMPANY:"Hindustan Unilever Ltd"
PRODUCT:"Dove Soap"

COMPLAINT:

"It’s that dove soap is smooth on skin than all other soaps... They tell people to check soap using litmus... the litmus turns blue in all cases except dove soap... The litmus turns blue in case of soap as it is basic in nature... what I want to say is they try to fool people by proving that dove is not harsh or so and by this they are trying to challenge the theory of science "

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek a personal hearing and submitted their written response. Advertiser states that Dove is a product which is designed to be mild on skin, unlike other soaps. As claim support data, the advertiser provided a forearm controlled application technique for estimating the relative mildness of personal cleansing products, reference from the International Journal of Cosmetic Science 2003, and results of product test. The claim support data was reviewed by the technical expert of ASCI. The CCC viewed the TVC and considered the Advertiser’s response as well as the opinion of the Technical expert presented at the meeting. As per the literature submitted, pH is relevant for determining the mildness of skin cleansing products. However, the protocol being referred to mentions contact time of 5 to 21 hrs. This contact time does not correspond to the typical contact time for bathing soaps. Thus, although Dove does not have alkaline pH; it is incorrect to conclude that it is milder than other alkaline soaps based on the pH parameter alone. As per data submitted by the advertiser, normal use conditions typically do not induce differentiable skin effect. Also, part from pH, the product mildness also depends on the other characteristics of the product composition and a soap with higher pH can be milder than soap with lower pH. The mildness claim for Dove was not adequately substantiated for the typical contact period for bathing soap on pH parameter alone. The CCC noted that showing a litmus test as an indicator for mildness with a voice over “litmus blue ho gaya” is misleading by implication. The CCC concluded that the reference to a litmus test to support the claim, “Harsh nahi, gentle chuniye” was not substantiated adequately, and is misleading. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the Code. The complaint was UPHELD. "

COMPANY:"Hindustan Unilever Ltd"
PRODUCT:"Lakme Iconic Kajal"

COMPLAINT:

“It’s the deep, black kajal that beats time for 22 long hours”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"Complaint 1 The ad was of Iconic Eyeliner featuring Kareena Kapoor which claims 22 hours of smudge free Kajal misleading as it gets smudgy in 15 hours itself. Complaint 2 The Advertiser makes the following claims: “A black so deep, it beats time. Endless travel? It beats that (Super – Smudge-proof). Constant deadlines? It beats that too (Super – Smudge-proof). It’s the deep, black kajal that beats time for 22 long hours” (Super – Lasts 22 hours) We submit that the above claims are misleading since the overall advertisement indicates that the kajal would remain as when applied (smudge-proof as indicated in the super of the ad) after 22 hours of application. The ad makes tall claims like “beats time for 22 long hours against endless travel and constant deadlines”. Kajal being an external make up product would get worn out and smudged, especially after 22 hours in a day. It seems far-fetched that the kajal would remain smudge-proof for 22 hours and remain as is when applied. The advertiser seems to fool the consumer by using such exaggerated and absolute claims for a Kajal. We request the advertiser to provide substantial scientific data to prove that this product remains smudge-proof and as when applied after 22 hours of application. In absence of such data, it is frivolous and deceiving to make the above claims indicating “Beats time for 22 long hours” to the gullible consumers. "

Recommendation: NOT UPHELD

"The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek a personal hearing and submitted their written response. Advertiser states that the claims made in the TVC are supported by an independent third party study and consumer perception assessment. The claim support data was reviewed by the technical expert of ASCI. The CCC viewed the TVC and considered the Advertiser’s response as well as opinion of the Technical expert presented at the meeting. The data presented by the advertiser supported long lasting properties of the product and smudge resistance. Based on this opinion, the CCC concluded that the claim, “It’s the deep, black kajal that beats time for 22 long hours”, was substantiated. The complaint was NOT UPHELD. "

COMPANY:"Trikhaldarshi Masaliya Aghori Bapu"
PRODUCT:"Icchadari Vashikaran"

COMPLAINT:

“The Claim: Icchadari Vashikaran .How is it possible to control someone?”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the concerned Media (Gujarat Samachar) for their assistance in providing the contact details of the advertiser. The media provided the details of the Advertising Agency handling this account. The ASCI requested the Advertising Agency for their response to address the complaint and also offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The Advertising Agency representatives informed ASCI that they are not responsible for this advertisement and the contents of the Advertisement were provided by the advertiser. The CCC viewed the print advertisement. In the absence of specific comments from the Advertiser/Advertising Agency, the CCC concluded that the claims (in Gujarathi), as translated in English, “Solution in 1 hour with 1000% guarantee (He makes impossible, possible)”, “Established since years and well-known, settled Solution for A TO Z problems”, “Double gold medalist, famous world over, king of tantra-mantra”, “Having many years’ experience”, “Eliminator of thousands of people’s suffering. Miracle of Girnar’s ascetic”, “Love problem, discord between husband and wife, problem with children, objects related to sorcery, Possibility of going abroad, divorce, one-sided love, getting rid of enemy, NRI problem, profit in business, land-property, debt-recovery, instant solution to all kinds of problems”, “Problem in going abroad, getting green card”, “Result at first attempt”, were not substantiated and are misleading by gross exaggeration. Also, the advertisement exploits the consumers’ lack of knowledge and is likely to lead to grave or widespread disappointment in the minds of consumers. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1, I.4 and I.5 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY:"Ford India Pvt Ltd "
PRODUCT:"Ford"

COMPLAINT:

“Ford ad on Facebook taking about quality checks and the checks they run are don't run by any other car company Ford India claims its quality checks are advance and no other company runs same kind of quality checks. This is a false claim because they deliberately do bit mention which these test are...”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Recommendation: NOT UPHELD

"The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek a personal hearing and submitted their written response. The CCC viewed the Facebook Advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response. The Advertiser states that the TVC refers to the instrumental panel shake test, the visual of which is highlighted in the TVC. Based on this data, and in the absence of any data contrary to the claim made, the CCC concluded that the claim, “We use equipment no one in India has, to give you the very best”, is not false and misleading. The complaint was NOT UPHELD. "

COMPANY:"Dr. Sneh's Mind Power"
PRODUCT:"Mind power workshop"

COMPLAINT:

"“The ad claims that attending this program you get freedom from - Depression, body diseases, negative thoughts, anger, stress and misunderstanding. This is exaggeration. - Another claim - Progress in job/business. - Another claim - sweetness in relationship - A huge claim of '20 Lac Indians benefited'. Exaggeration again.” "

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"This claim needs to be substantiated with necessary support data "

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek a personal hearing and submitted their written response. The CCC viewed the advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response. Advertiser states that the claims made in the advertisement are the views shared by the people who have attended their workshop. As claim support data for “20 Lac Indians benefited”, the advertiser provided details regarding number of visitors to their you tube, Google plus and Facebook links. However this data does not prove that 20 lakh people have actually benefitted by the advertised treatment. The CCC concluded that the claims (in Gujarathi) as translated in English, “attending this program you get freedom from - Depression, body diseases, negative thoughts, anger, stress and misunderstanding”, “Progress in job/business”, “sweetness in relationship”, “'20 Lac Indians benefited'”, were not substantiated with authentic scientific evidence and are misleading by exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the Code. The complaint was UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY:"SpiceJet Ltd "
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"Spicejet had the same photo in their in flight magazine and I ordered it based on that photo. The box photo also was similar but the actual product as you can see is nothing similar. When I complained I was told that the pic was just advertising. This complaint is regarding what SpiceJet advertises as their in-flight meal and what they deliver.The ad is basically a menu photograph in their in-flight magazine. I can't get a copy or clipping of it unless I again travel on the flight. However they advertise the same thing on their website. http://spicejet.com/HotMealMenu.aspx Here you can clearly see what is shown as the Masala Fritata in the picture. However what they serve to the customer is completely different. It is supposed to be a block of egg whites with tomatoes, onions etc but as you can see in the picture I had initially submitted it had nothing. "

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek a personal hearing. The CCC noted that the advertiser sent standard Customer Service responses to ASCI seeking information regarding the passengers name, flight number, travelling sectors and their contact details and indicating that they would get in touch with the complainant. ASCI provided the requested details and requested the advertiser’s exhaustive response in respect of the complaint pertaining the mismatch of the product visual in the advertisement on the web-site and the actual product served to the complainant. The CCC viewed the website advertisement (menu photograph). In the absence of specific comments from the advertiser, the CCC concluded that the visual of the product shown on the product packaging and on the website did not resemble the actual product in the box served to the complainant and is misleading. The product packaging and the website advertisement contravened Chapter I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY:"Aliya Shoes"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"A small girl (shown as a cobbler) siting at the road side and is mending shoes, finding it difficult to stitch them. But when she sees another man wearing shoes of aliya brand she is relieved. It is promoting child labor in a way by showing a small girl mending shoes. A young girl like the one shown in the TVC is supposed to go to school and not work. while we need to encourage girl education this TVC is a bad example and should be upheld. "

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the concerned Media (Kairali TV) for their assistance in providing the contact details of the advertiser, or to forward the grievances of the complainant to the advertiser. The ASCI also tried to establish a contact with the advertiser based on the contact detail in the TVC. The CCC noted that no response was received from the advertiser or from the concerned media prior to the due date. The CCC viewed the TVC (in Tamil) provided by the complainant and noted that the TVC shows the protagonist (a minor girl) sitting on the road side mending shoes. The CCC concluded that the TVC is encouraging/promoting child labour which is in violation of The Child Labour (Prohibition and Regulation) Act, 1986. The TVC contravened Chapter III.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY:"Mahagun Group (Mahagun Housefull offer)"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“In a full front page Ad from Magahgun group (Builder in Noida and NCR) is offering flats at starting price for aprox 69 Lacs in their Moderne project. They also called me stating the same, In the ad (in print and online media) and in subsequent calls on showing interest, Mahagun is misleading home buyers that the starting price of the flat is 68.5 lacks. However no flat is costing that much. 68.5 lacs is BSP X super built up area (which is also heavily loaded). In addition, there is not a single flat they are selling on BSP, for every flat they are adding additional PLC to every flat, plus there are other charges such as possession charges, parking, club, among others. All these items add another 10 to 15 lacs to the cost."

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the print and the website advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claims, “Price starts 68.37 lacs onwards”, “Move into a fully furnished home at no extra cost”, were not substantiated with supporting evidence of the customers who have availed of this offer. Also, the claims are misleading by exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY:"State Bank of India"
PRODUCT:"SBI Quiz Contest"

COMPLAINT:

"Misleading (Probable scam) advertisement by State bank of India during the telecast of Pro-Kabaddi matches on http://www.hotstar.com State Bank of India is official associate sponsors of Pro Kabaddi Season 4 which is being telecast on http://www.hotstar.com (Hotstar is an online video streaming platform owned by Novi Digital Entertainment Private Limited, a wholly owned subsidiary of Star India Private Limited) During the telecast of Kabaddi matches State Bank of India is advertising for their Home loan and Car loan. During this advertise, viewers are asked to participate in Quiz contest by sending SMS with correct answer to number 567676. The lucky winner will get Moto g turbo phone free. Unlike other quiz contest advertisement no required details (such as Terms and Condition, when winners will be announced, how they will be announced, cost of SMS to sender, time frame to send SMS and where we will get details of contest) are provided during the advertisement. I have searched for the details on State Bank of India website (https://www.sbi.co.in/portal/web/personalbanking/sbinew-car-loan-scheme) as well as pro-Kabaddi website http://www.prokabaddi.com/ and all possible sources. But no details of such contest were found. If any such contest exist is should at least have some basic information on banks website. I think this is some kind of fraud in which viewers are asked to participate through sending SMS and participant are charged for such SMS and no such contest exit. I will request you to investigate any such quiz contest exit. If any such contest exist, why details are not revealed? and how transparent these quiz contest are? and is this any kind of fraud to viewers? I have attached screenshot of the telecasted advertisement, you will also find the web address of the online streaming site in the same. These advertisement are being telecasted daily during pro kabbadi matches starting from 25th Jun. Please see attached document for details. My objection is Unlike other quiz contest advertisement has no required details are available any where: • No where terms and condition available (not on SBI site nor anywhere else) • They ask different question with option A or B. For few questions option A is correct and for others option B. Sending the response to these questions are not time limited and no identification for correct answer sent are of which question. Hence there is possible denial saying correct answer not send. • When winners will be announced? • How they will be announced • Cost of SMS to sender? • Time frame to send SMS ? • Where we will get details of contest?” "

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the screen shots of the TVC provided by the complainant. The CCC noted that the Advertiser did not provide any details regarding the modality of the contest (details of the contest, process followed, details of winners etc.) to prove that the “SBI Home and Car loan quiz contest” is genuine. Also, the contest was misleading by omission of the mention of date of execution and the date of announcements of winners of the contest. The advertiser has not stated clearly all material conditions so as to enable the consumer to obtain a true and fair view of their prospects in such activities. The CCC concluded that the TVC contravened Chapters I.1, I.4 and I.5(f) of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"Chennais Amirthas Institute Of Hotel Management"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“The advertisement is about getting employment before graduation and making claims of overseas employment in hotel management.. It creates a false image regarding the education system and employment sector.. There are cases of students committing suicide in their hostels for unknown reasons ... They are taking the certificates of the students as custody on enrollment and failing to give it back when they discontinue the course midway .. They claim world class infrastructure n their premises in the advertisement but the reality is students are provided unhygienic places to stay .. Their advertisements are on a carpet bombarding with 50 seconds ad every 10 minutes in every regional tamil channels .. Their advertisements are all over the internet for your reference.. Kindly take up the issue .. If these things continue education sector advertisements will lose its merit .”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek a personal hearing and submitted their written response through their advocates. Advocate states that that random anonymous complaints are being given by the competitors including ex-partners of their client without any substantiation. The advocate has enclosed the order passed by the Hon’ble High Court of Madras. The CCC viewed the TVC (in Tamil) provided by the complainant. In the absence of specific comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the voice over claim, “Now what you all will be seeing is our Chennais Amirthas infrastructure”, and the visual showing the infrastructure of the institute are misleading. Also, the voice over claims of “100” Job”, “Rs.10,000/- salary during the course of studies”, “overseas employment after graduation”, were not substantiated with supporting evidence. Also, these claims are misleading by exaggeration. The TVC contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY:"Rajvaidya Shital Prasad & Sons"
PRODUCT:"Hempushpa"

COMPLAINT:

"1. Women Health Issues? Treat it from the Roots. 2. No. 1 Medicine and Tonic trusted of crores of women since 90 years "

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date for this complaint. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim (in Hindi), “No. 1 Medicine and Tonic trusted of crores of women since 90 years”, was not substantiated with supporting proof, and is misleading by exaggeration. Claim, “Women Health Issues? Treat it from the Roots” was not substantiated with evidence of product efficacy, and is misleading. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY:"Olefia Biopharma Limited"
PRODUCT:"Votif Range of Products"

COMPLAINT:

"1. The lack of sexual desire 2. Premature ejaculation & nightfall 3. Scanty & thin semen 4. Swelling on nerves & lack of strength 5. Low sperm count & their weakness 6. Incomplete development of organs 7. Inability to complete the act of Fertility 8. Sagging of organ due to old age "

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date for this complaint. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim (in Hindi), as translated in English, “The lack of sexual desire”, “Premature ejaculation & nightfall”, “Scanty & thin semen”, “Swelling on nerves & lack of strength”, “Low sperm count & their weakness”, “Incomplete development of organs”, “Inability to complete the act of Fertility”, “Sagging of organ due to old age”, were not substantiated with evidence of product efficacy, and are misleading. Specific to the claims implying treatment for all sexual problems, and the claims, “The lack of sexual desire”, “Premature ejaculation & nightfall”, “Inability to complete the act of Fertility”, “Decrease in Erection”, read in conjunction with the advertisement visual implies that the product is meant for enhancement of sexual pleasure and is in Breach of the law as it violated The Drugs & Magic Remedies Act. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1, I.4 and III.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY:"G. L. Bajaj Group of Institutions - G. L. Bajaj Institute of Technology and Management"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"1. Ranked 1 Again. 2. The Leader Once Again 3. 96% Placement in the Second Round (till April,16) "

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claims, “Ranked 1 Again”, and “The Leader Once Again”, were not substantiated with supporting proof and are misleading. Claim, “Ranked 1 Again”, was not qualified to mention the year, source of data. Advertiser did not provide evidence to show on what parameters they are claiming to be the leader, nor did they provide any comparative data or any third party validation or research to prove this claim. Claim, “96% Placement in the Second Round (till April,16)”, was not substantiated with authentic supporting data such as detailed list of students who have been placed through their Institute, contact details of students for verification, enrolment forms and appointment letters received by the students, and details of the batch size of the students. Also, the claim is misleading exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY:"Accurate Group of Institutions"
PRODUCT:"Accurate Institute of Management & Technology"

COMPLAINT:

“100% Placement Track Record”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim, “100% Placement Track Record”, was not substantiated with authentic data such as year wise detailed list of students who have been placed through their Institute, contact details of students for verification, enrolment forms and appointment letters received by the students, nor any independent audit or verification certificate. Also, the claim is misleading by exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY:"Adesh Institute of Technology"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“100% Job Guarantee”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim, “100% Job Guarantee”, was not substantiated with authentic supporting data such as detailed list of students who have been placed through their Institute, contact details of students for verification, enrolment forms and appointment letters received by the students, nor any independent audit or verification certificate. Also, the claim is misleading by exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"I.T.S Education Group"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“100% Placement”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim, “100% Placement”, was not substantiated with data such as detailed list of students who have been placed through their Institute, contact details of students for verification, enrolment forms and appointment letters received by the students, nor any independent audit or verification certificate. Also, the claim is misleading by exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY:"Swift Group Of Institutions - Swift Academy Of Design"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“The No.1 Design Institute of India.”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim, “The No.1 Design Institute of India”, was not substantiated with comparative data versus other similar institutes in the same category or any third party validation or research to prove this claim. Also, the claim is misleading by exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD. "

 
 

COMPANY:"RedBricks Education"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“British Council - International School Award 2014-2017”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek a personal hearing and submitted their written response. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response. As claim support data, the advertiser provided a copy of the award, photographs and news coverage, and a copy of the certificate showing that the institute has been recognised for outstanding development of international learning in the curriculum. The CCC concluded that the claim, “British Council - International School Award 2014-2017”, was not qualified to mention the source, date when the award was granted and category for which the institute was given the award and was considered to be misleading by ambiguity. Based on the feedback from the British Council International School Award (ISA), the advertisement also appears to be in violation of the ISA guidelines. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY:"CEDP Skill Institute"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“100% Job Guarantee.”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim, “100% Job Guarantee”, was not substantiated with authentic supporting data such as detailed list of students who have been placed through their Institute, contact details of students for verification, enrolment forms and appointment letters received by the students, nor any independent audit or verification certificate. Also, the claim is misleading by exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY: "Malabar College of Engineering and Technology"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“Ranked No.1 Engineering College.”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim, “Ranked No.1 Engineering College”, was not substantiated with supporting data such as comparative data versus other similar institutes, or any third party validation or research to prove this claim and is misleading by exaggeration. The claim was not qualified to mention the year, source of data. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1, I.2 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY: "ABS Foundation "
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“No.1 Commerce Institute In CG”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim, “No.1 Commerce Institute In CG”, was not substantiated with comparative data versus other similar institutes in the same category or any third party validation or research to prove this claim. Also, the claim is misleading by exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY: "Amrita University "
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“Amrita Vishwa Vidyapeetham University, ranked No.1 Private University in India”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim, “Amrita Vishwa Vidyapeetham University, ranked No.1 Private University in India”, was not substantiated with supporting data with comparative data versus other similar institutes, or any third party validation or research to prove this claim and is misleading by exaggeration. Also, the claim was not qualified to mention the year, source of data. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1, I.2 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY:"IIHT Networks (Indian Institute of Hardware Tec)"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"1. Asia’s No.1 Institute 2. 100% Job Support. "

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim (in Gujarati), as translated in English, “Asia’s No. 1 Institute”, was not substantiated with comparative data versus other similar institutes or any third party validation or research to prove this claim. Claim and is misleading by exaggeration. Also, the CCC considered the use of “100%” numerical claim not relevant for “job support” claim and the use of “100%” as a descriptor in the claim is misleading by implication. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1 and I.4 of \the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY: "Lovely Professional University"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“One of the Highest Placement Records in India.”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim, “One of the Highest Placement Records in India”, was not substantiated with authentic evidence and/or validation by an independent third party, and is misleading by exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY: "Sathyabama University"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“100% Placement.”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim, “100% Placement”, was not substantiated with supporting data such as detailed list of students who have been placed through their Institute, contact details of students for verification, enrolment forms and appointment letters received by the students, nor any independent audit or verification certificate. Also, the claim is misleading by exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY: "NRT India"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“India's No. 1 Coaching Certified by India Book of Records.”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek a personal hearing but requested for a discussion telephonically, which was offered to them. In the telecom the advertiser stated that he has been recognized by India Book of records. The CCC noted that no formal response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim, “India's No. 1 Coaching Certified by India Book of Records”, was not substantiated with supporting data, and is misleading by exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY: "IAM Business School"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“No.1 Rank Centre for CA/CMA, ACCA/CS/SAP.”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim, “No.1 Rank Centre for CA/CMA, ACCA/CS/SAP”, was not substantiated with supporting data for the ranking claimed in the advertisement or any third party validation or research to prove this Claim. Also the claim is misleading by exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY:"E Mould Education Centre"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“Job Assurance.”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim, “Job Assurance”, was not substantiated and is misleading by exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY:"Mahatma Gandhi Mission (Institute of Hotel Management and Catering Technology)"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“100% Premium Placement.”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim, “100% Premium Placement”, was not substantiated with supporting data such as detailed list of students who have been placed through their Institute, contact details of students for verification, enrolment forms and appointment letters received by the students, nor any independent audit or verification certificate. Also the claim is misleading by exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY:"VPMM Education Trust "
PRODUCT:"V.P.Muthaih Pillai Meenakshi Ammal Engineering College for Women "

COMPLAINT:

“100% Placement.”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim, “100% Placement”, was not substantiated with supporting data such as detailed list of students who have been placed through their Institute, contact details of students for verification, enrolment forms and appointment letters received by the students, nor any independent audit or verification certificate. Also, the claim is misleading by exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY:"Sobhasaria Janakalyan Trust"
PRODUCT: "Sobhasaria Group of Institution"

COMPLAINT:

"1. “100% Placement. 2. “First in Rajasthan with 50% student having multiple offers” "

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim, “100% Placement”, was not substantiated with authentic supporting data such as detailed list of students who have been placed through their Institute, contact details of students for verification, enrolment forms and appointment letters received by the students, nor any independent audit or verification certificate, and is misleading. Claim, “First in Rajasthan with 50% student having multiple offers”, was not substantiated with supporting evidence, and is misleading by exageration. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY:"Mother Teresa Group Of College-"
PRODUCT:"Mother Teresa School of Nursing"

COMPLAINT:

“100% Job Oriented Course”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the advertisement. The CCC considered the use of “100%” numerical descriptor not relevant for the claim, “Job Oriented Course”, and is misleading by implication. The advertisement with claim “100% Job Oriented Course” contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapter I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY:"Dronacharya Institute of Engineers Private Limited"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“India's No.1 Institute”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim, “India's No.1 Institute”, was not substantiated with comparative data versus other similar institutes, and is misleading. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY: "Immanueak Arasar Group of Institution"
PRODUCT:"Immanuel Arasar JJ College of Engineering"

COMPLAINT:

“100% Placement”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim, “100% Placement”, was not substantiated with authentic supporting data such as detailed list of students who have been placed through their Institute, contact details of students for verification, enrolment forms and appointment letters received by the students, nor any independent audit or verification certificate. Also, the claim is misleading by exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY:"Sri Adichunchanagiri Shik Trust"
PRODUCT:"Sri Adichunchanagi College Of Pharmacy"

COMPLAINT:

“100% Placement”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim, “100% Placement”, was not substantiated with authentic supporting data such as detailed list of students who have been placed through their Institute, contact details of students for verification, enrolment forms and appointment letters received by the students, nor any independent audit or verification certificate. Also, the claim is misleading by exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY:"Patanjali IAS Classes"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“India's No.1 Institute”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim (in Hindi), as translated in English, “India’s No.1 Institute”, was not substantiated with comparative data versus other similar institutes, or any third party validation or research to prove this claim and is misleading by exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY: "Jaya Group Of Institutions"
PRODUCT:"Jaya College of Arts & Science"

COMPLAINT:

“100% Placement”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim, “100% Placement”, was not substantiated with authentic supporting data such as detailed list of students who have been placed through their Institute, contact details of students for verification, enrolment forms and appointment letters received by the students, nor any independent audit or verification certificate. Also, the claim is misleading by exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY: "Geetanjali Centre of Excellence"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“100% Guarantee of Getting Pass”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim (in Gujarathi), as translated in English, “100% Guarantee of Getting Pass”, was not substantiated and is misleading by exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY: "Frankfinn Aviation Services Pvt. Ltd"
PRODUCT:"Frankfinn Institute Of Air Hostess Training"

COMPLAINT:

“World's No.1 Air Hostess Training Institute”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim, “World's No.1 Air Hostess Training Institute”, was not substantiated with comparative data versus other similar institutes, or any third party validation or research to prove this claim and is misleading by exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY:"Sophia Group Of College"
PRODUCT:"Sophia Homeopathic Medical College & Sophia Nursing College"

COMPLAINT:

“100% Placement Record”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim, “100% Placement record”, was not substantiated with authentic data such as detailed list of students who have been placed through their Institute, contact details of students for verification, enrolment forms and appointment letters received by the students, nor any independent audit or verification certificate. Also, the claim is misleading by exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY:"Nikita International School"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“Best International School Award - Accredited For the Period 2014 - 2017”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim, “Best International School Award - Accredited For the Period 2014 – 2017”, was not substantiated with supporting data, and is misleading. Also, the claim was not qualified to mention the source, date when the award was granted and category for which the institute was given the award and was considered to be misleading by ambiguity. Based on the feedback from the British Council International School Award (ISA), the advertisement also appears to be in violation of the ISA guidelines. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY:"Madras Institute of Engineering Technology"
PRODUCT:"TMG College of Hotel Management & Catering"

COMPLAINT:

“100% Job Placement”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim, “100% Job Placement”, was not substantiated with authentic data such as detailed list of students who have been placed through their Institute, contact details of students for verification, enrolment forms and appointment letters received by the students, nor any independent audit or verification certificate and is misleading by exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY:"Ram Animation Studio Pvt. Ltd"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“100% Placement”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim, “100% Placement”, was not substantiated with authentic data such as detailed list of students who have been placed through their Institute, contact details of students for verification, enrolment forms and appointment letters received by the students, nor any independent audit or verification certificate. Also, the claim is misleading by exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY:"Career Benchmark Academy"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“100% Success or fee refund Guarantee”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim, “100% success or fee refund Guarantee”, was not substantiated with supporting evidence, and is misleading by exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY:"Ambition Institute"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“No.1 Institute for IIT-JEET&PMT”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim, “No.1 Institute for IIT-JEET&PMT”, was not substantiated with comparative data versus other similar institutes, nor any independent audit or verification certificate and is misleading. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY:"B P Food Products Pvt Ltd"
PRODUCT:"Double Trishul Atta"

COMPLAINT:

“The Double Trishul Atta Chakki Fresh Atta is packed with natural food grade packing material so that the entire family can be protected from many serious diseases.”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"In response to ASCI letter seeking for comments from the Advertiser, their Advocates responded on Advertiser’s behalf requesting for extension of seven days time. Subsequently the advertiser responded seeking two weeks time to respond. The advertiser was granted an extension of seven days to the standard lead time to submit their reply. The advertiser representatives were given personal hearing by ASCI, and were requested to substantiate only part of the claim pertaining to linkage to various diseases being made in the advertisement (and not for the food grade of the material). Advertiser responded prior to the extended due date. The CCC viewed the advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response. As claim support data, the advertiser provided certificate of packaging material being food grade. Advertiser states that it is apparent from the certificate that the bags supplied to them are made from food grade material which is odorless, clean, non-toxic and not in any way harmful for human edible purpose. Advertiser did not provide any support data to show how the product offers “family protection from many serious diseases”. The CCC concluded that the claims (in Hindi) as translated in English, “The Double Trishul Atta Chakki Fresh Atta is packed with natural food grade packing material so that the entire family can be protected from many serious diseases”, was not substantiated and is misleading. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the Code. The complaint was UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY:"Eastern Foods Pvt Ltd"
PRODUCT:"Eastern Spices"

COMPLAINT:

“India's No.1 Spice company.”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek a personal hearing and submitted their written response. The CCC viewed the advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response. Advertiser states that they compete with other masalas in volume handled, taste , largest exporter and the network reach in pan India and that stands for their claim as India’s No.1 spice company. As claim support data, the advertiser provided a copy of the volume sales for the years 2014-15 and 2015-16, certified by the Chartered Accountant, and copy of award given to the advertiser by the Spices Board India for being topmost exporter of spice mixes and curry powder for the year 2013-14. The CCC reviewed this data and noted that all the data submitted pertains to only the advertiser’s own performance. Advertiser has not provided any data to prove their leadership in either value or volume terms. The CCC concluded that the claim, “India's No.1 Spice company”, was not substantiated with comparative data versus other similar brands in the same category, and with market share sales data, and is misleading exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.4 and I.4 of the Code. The complaint was UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY:"Organic India Pvt Ltd"
PRODUCT:"Organic Ghee"

COMPLAINT:

"“100% Organic” “From organically raised mother cows cared for with love & compassion.” “USDA Organic” Pack claim in Ad – “100% certified organic” "

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek a personal hearing and submitted their written response. The CCC viewed the advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response. Advertiser states that their product is certified Organic by certifying body, Biocert International, which ensures the product is Organic and in compliance with the standards. Also, the advertiser works with small and marginal farmers and for obtaining ghee, milk is procured from certified organic small and marginal farmers group. As claim support data, the advertiser provided certificate of compliance issued by Biocert International. The advertiser has, however, not provided any details of the criteria for qualifying the Ghee as “100%” Organic, conditions for “organically” raising cows and evidence of small farmers fulfilling such criteria. The CCC also noted that the advertisement does refer to the Biocert as certifying body. The CCC concluded that the claims, “100% Organic”, “USDA Organic”, “From organically raised mother cows"" and Pack claim in the Ad “100% certified organic”, were not adequately substantiated with supporting evidence. Also, these claims are considered to be misleading by ambiguity. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the Code. The complaint was UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY:"Godfrey Phillips India Ltd"
PRODUCT: "Pan Vilas Pan Masala"

COMPLAINT:

“India’s Most Trusted Brand”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Recommendation: UPHELD

""The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek a personal hearing and submitted their written response. The CCC viewed the advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response. Advertiser states that the product was awarded ""India's Most Trusted Brand"" in the Pan Masala category for the year 2015 by InfoMedia (International Brand Consulting and Research Company) & Media Research Group (MRG). As claim support data, the advertiser provided a copy of the Invitation, Certificate and photograph of the Trophy awarded. The CCC concluded that although the claim, “India’s Most Trusted Brand”, was substantiated, the claim was misleading by omission of the mention of the specific product category as well as source and date of research and criteria for assessment for the claim made. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.2 and I.4 of the Code. The complaint was UPHELD. ""

 

COMPANY: "Godfrey Phillips India Ltd"
PRODUCT: "Pan Vilas Pan Masala"

COMPLAINT:

“India s most trusted brand awards.” The Supers not legible

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek a personal hearing and submitted their written response. The CCC viewed the TVC and considered the Advertiser’s response. Advertiser states that the product was awarded ""India's Most Trusted Brand"" in the Pan Masala category for the year 2015 by InfoMedia (International Brand Consulting and Research Company) & Media Research Group (MRG). As claim support data, the advertiser provided a copy of the Invitation, Certificate and photograph of the Trophy awarded. The CCC concluded that although the claim, “India’s Most Trusted Brand”, was substantiated, the claim was misleading by omission of mention of the specific product category as well as the source and date of research and criteria for assessment for the claim made. The TVC contravened Chapters I.2 and I.4 of the Code. Also, the supers in the TVC were not legible and contravened the ASCI Guidelines on Supers. The complaint was UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY:"Veekay Natural Foods"
PRODUCT: "Nutri Millets"

COMPLAINT:

“No added maida, preservatives, cholesterol, transfat”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"i heard without maida is not possible to do these Cookies "

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date for this complaint. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim, “No added maida, preservatives, cholesterol, transfat”, was not substantiated and is misleading. The advertisement – promotional material contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY: "Kellogg India P. Ltd."
PRODUCT: "Chocos"

COMPLAINT:

"“The Chocos Box have a message on the front side in big letters “Free 2 Pokemon 3D puzzles 4 to collect"". So naturally when a child sees this will but this seeing that puzzle is in the box.But actual message is on the side of the box in smaller letters “Find exciting pokemon surprises inside select pack of"" 1) This is a case of misleading advertising since the main side do not mention actual message. 2) Even if the child reads the message on the side and may not want the Chocos but still buy the product for the toys inside, thinking maybe there are toys inside. This is leading to gambling in the minds of a child. PFA the screenshot of the product. Please have moral values and remove this message and callback all such boxes and instead in the next batch accept and mention SORRY to customrs for putting such message. I had even called customer care and they responded that someone will call back, no one did.” "

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: NOT UPHELD

"The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek a personal hearing and submitted their written response. The CCC viewed the product packaging and considered the Advertiser’s response. Advertiser states that the packaging carries the communication that a set of 2 Pokemon 30 puzzles is available free with every Chocos Box, also the front of the Box has the text "ask your retailer for your free 2 Pokemon 30 puzzles with this pack". As claim support data, the advertiser submitted the product packs and a sample of the Puzzles given as free gifts along with the pack. The CCC concluded that the promotional claims on the product packaging are not misleading. The complaint was NOT UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY: "TimesJobs.com (India’s most loved CEO)"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"Complaint 01: “Please review the ad for inappropriate reference...” Complaint 02: “The issue is regarding an explicit advertisement published in the Times of India today the 28th of July 2016 (Chandigarh edition second last page). The main copy of the advertisement "I SPENT SOMETIME WITH THE CEO AND GOT A PROMOTION" below the picture of a beautiful girl is found to be obnoxious. On the social media platform of Media and Communications professionals a lot of uproar has been raised. The group "Communicators Longe" a lot many women members have raised their voice like approaching the ASCI and NCW etc. The image is attached hereto. Hope you would take care.”"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainants. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date for these complaints. The CCC viewed the Youtube advertisement and the print advertisements. The CCC concluded that in the context of the Ad for Timesjob, the protagonist in the TVC saying “I spent some time with the CEO and got a promotion”, is suggestive, objectify women and indecent in the depiction of woman which is likely in the light of generally prevailing standards of decency to cause grave and widespread offence. In the context of the Ads for Timesjob, the woman shown in one print advertisement saying “My CEO is the only person who wants to give me raise”, and in the other advertisement saying, “I spent some time with the CEO and got a promotion”, are suggestive, objectify women and indecent in the depiction of women which is likely in the light of generally prevailing standards of decency to cause grave and widespread offence. The print advertisements and the YouTube advertisement contravened Chapter II of the Code. The complaints were UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"P.K. University "
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"P K University showing images in their newspaper advertisements which do not belong to them."

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the print advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC observed that the print advertisement does not show actual image of the advertised institute. The picture portrays a grand structure similar to Mysore Palace, which is false and grossly misleading. The advertisement contravened Clause 4c of the Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs (“Visual of Infrastructure of the Institution shown in Advertisement shall be real and existing at the time of ad’s release”), as well as Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"Chetanta"
PRODUCT:"Get Diabetes cured by acupressure Spring."

COMPLAINT:

“As a doctor i want to draw attention to todays 12.7.16 tuesday Vadodara newspaper front page advt in Gujarat samachar claiming a quack treating ..curing diabetic sufferers by accupressure spring .rs 500 plus 3500 treatment charge. This newspaper continues to print advt as last time I pointed out successfully advt for Increasing Height in this news paper.Public will be misguided and keave simple diet lifestyle changes exercise medicine insulin only if needed Medical treatment and sufffer stroke or loose foot due to diabetes. Sending you advts ..for”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim (in Gujarathi), as translated in English, “Diabetes expert Dr. Chetan Daswani has treated innumerable patients and they have benefited from it. Dr. Daswani cures the disease of diabetes without giving any medicine, injection, tablet. He has done this successful research”, were not substantiated with data to prove qualifications of Dr Chetan Daswani as a diabetes expert, clinical evidence to support treatment without medicine and are grossly misleading. Also, specific to the claims related to treatment for Diabetes, the advertisement is in breach of the law as it violated The Drugs & Magic Remedies Act. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1, I.4 and III.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"Zikimo Trends"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"Mirror work suit was advertised - I ordered product but is was totally different from that advertised Product ordered from website image. I have all whatsapp messages that led me to believe the product I ordered is that as advertised but when received it was not same product. I asked for a refund and was told I'm not eligible. I have reason to believe the images used for advertising do not have copyright over them and am now out of pocket due to this fraud. Please find screen shots of the product as advertised followed by the product I was sent. Here is the message which they confirmed its made from mirror (on the suit it's foil like material) Please also see messages with dates that show the product was promised to be delivered in 7 days but it took 20 days. Also they said they will send me a picture before stitching as their refund policy does not cover stitched products but they did not send that. Please stop them doing this to anyone else urgently On Saturday 2nd July I told them it was incorrect and they need to rectify but they will not cooperate. Now I have been blocked from their Facebook and whatsapp and they not responding to any messages"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek a personal hearing and requested ASCI to share the complainant’s details with his order No. Post Complainant’s permission, his details were shared with the advertiser. The Advertiser did not provide their specific comments with respect to the mismatch of the product advertised ad product delivered. The CCC viewed the website advertisement and concluded that the visual of the advertised product that was ordered by the complainant did not resemble the actual product delivered to the complainant. While the product claimed to have mirror work, it appeared to have foil work and not mirror work. The CCC concluded that the claim, “Full Mirror work Punjabi salwar kameez at Zikimo” and the visual representation of the product is false and misleading. The website advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY: "Parul University "
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“10,000 + Placements in 500 + Industries”, “Recognized by UGC, New Delhi”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"The ad contains name of courses as well as number of placements made by the university. The number of placements seems unrealistic as it says 500+ industries. Also, the line that states 'Recognized by UGC, New Delhi'. But on checking the UGC Website, http://www.ugc.ac.in/privateuniversitylist.aspx?id=7&Unitype=3 I found that the compliance to UGC visit by UGC expert committee is still pending.” Here is link to UGC website also attached screenshot. For claim of placement I don't have any data but it clearly seems exaggeration. Also attached divya Bhaskar page."

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim, “10,000 + Placements in 500 + Industries”, was not substantiated with authentic supporting data such as detailed list of students who have been placed through their Institute, contact details of students for verification, enrolment forms and appointment letters received by the students. Also, the claim is misleading by exaggeration. The claim, “Recognized by UGC, New Delhi”, was not substantiated with supporting proof. Also, this claim is misleading as the UGC website shows that the compliance to UGC visit by UGC expert committee is still pending as substantiated by the complainant. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"Tata Housing Development Company Limited"
PRODUCT:"TATA Value Homes"

COMPLAINT:

"This came as a shocker for me as the name TATA is synonymous to a brand which is clean and when a company like TATA comes out with misleading advertisement its sad. This is the advertisement by Tata Value homes which is there online here are the various links 1. http://tatavaluehomes.com/ this is the opening page. 2. http://tatavaluehomes.com/new-haven/mumbaiboisar-2/detail this is the second page where one opts for the flat. 3. Then I clicked on 1.5 BHK and clicked on view payment break up. 4. http://tatavaluehomes.com/new-haven/mumbaiboisar-2/detail#0 This is the link which shows the break up. 5. The total cost shown here is Rs. 24,47,985/- In this total cost they did not put the star that, the price may vary as per choice of unit. 6. The company could have easily pointed this out. 7. Application money to be paid on or before 19th of July 2016, second amount to be paid on or before 4th of August 2016. The booking amount of Rupees 30,000 is not refundable if the application money is not paid on or before the mentioned date. After I make the payment online this is what happens 1. When I made the payment of Rs. 30,000/- I did not receive any reciept. 2. The carpet area alloted is 458 that is 11 squre feet more, and for this 11 squarefeet they revise the Actual amount of Rs. 24,47,985/- to Rs. 25,51,500/- 3. The cost sheet sent to me had all the value and dates changed for the payment This is what I got as a cost sheet. Please note that the next Payments of Rs 2,25,150/- & Rs 2,34,850/- have to be made on or before 18th July 2016 & 3rd August 2016 respectively to complete the booking process. In case of Non-receipt of Payment with in the given dates your booking will stand cancelled. The earnest money i.e Rs 30,000 paid towards your expression of interest for booking is Non-Refundable. The company changed the date of payment of application from 19th as mentioned in the website to 18th and 4th August to 3rd August 2016 or my booking amount of Rs. 30,000/- is forfieted. For me this is clear case of cheating and fraud against which I shall be Filing a police complaint also. If this is the start then I dread what is in store for people investing in this project. Kindly take up this matter at the earliest so that quick action is taken by the society and people like me are saved from agony that is in store for us in the future."

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the website advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the base price quoted for the 1.5 BHK Unit as Rs.24, 47, 985/- is misleading as the total cost of the flat is higher than that advertised (Ad claims, “Price Range Rs.18.44 lac onwards 1.5 BHK, 1 BHK, 2.5 BHK, 2 BHK”). The advertisement contravened Chapter I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY: "DHI-Hair Restoration"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"“World’s No. 1 Hair Restoration Company”, “Ranked no. 1 by IMRB”, “Offers solution to all stages of hair loss “200,000 delighted clients”, “120 procedures every day”"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"“Appeared In - The Times of India Jaipur edition - 24 April 2016 Language- English Description - Print ad Claims1. World’s No. 1 Hair Restoration Company 2. Ranked no. 1 by IMRB 3.Offers solution to all stages of hair loss 4.200,000 delighted clients 5.120 procedures every day Our objections1. How does DHI claim it is World’s No. 1 Hair Restoration Company. Are there independent studies to prove the claim? 2. Who is it compared to and what the parameters for ranking DHI as no. 1 are. Are there independent studies to prove the claim. Claim 2 needs to be substantiated and certified by competent authority. 3. What does it mean by saying it offers solution to all stages of hair loss. Please explain. 4. Are the solutions all related to companys products and/or services. Explain 5. Claim 4 and 5 needs to be substantiated by independent research data. Action to be taken - We propose that the advertisement should be not be released further."

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claims, “World’s No. 1 Hair Restoration Company”, “Offers solution to all stages of hair loss”, “200,000 delighted clients”, “120 procedures every day”, were not substantiated with supporting proof, and are misleading. The claim, “Ranked no. 1 by IMRB”, was not substantiated. The parameters on which it was ranked No.1 was not made available. Also, the date and source for this claim as a reference was not indicated in the advertisement, and is misleading by ambiguity. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1, I.2, and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"The KCP Limited "
PRODUCT:"KCP Cement"

COMPLAINT:

"“It describes major projects were KCP cement was used, it has included prakasam barrage in andhra Pradesh as one of the areas where their cement was used. The prakasam barrage was constructed between 1954 to 1957 and opened in 1957 as listed in Wikipedia whereas the company is in cement business from 1958, so how is it possible? Can you verify the claims once so that public is not mislead”"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek a personal hearing and submitted their written response. The CCC viewed the TVC and considered the Advertiser’s response. Advertiser argues that the information furnished in Wikipedia need not be authentic to issue notice to them. They further stated that they have lost the supporting documents and would not be able to substantiate their claim. The CCC noted that the available information in the Public domain indicates that the Prakasam barrage was constructed between 1954 to 1957 i.e. prior to the advertiser’s company being founded. The CCC concluded that the TVC (in Tamil) showing an image of Prakasam Barrage was misleading by implication as the usage of KCP cement for it’s construction was not substantiated. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"Magic Bricks Reality Services Ltd"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"“Fraudulent advertising of property is being undertaken by agents like Nausheen Real Estate, on your Portal. Dear Magic Bricks, Fraudulent advertising of property is being undertaken by agents like Nausheen Real Estate, on your Portal. This is being tracked by me. The latest example is attached, uploaded by Nousheen Real Estate for a property that does not exist. The concerned agent hurriedly cut the call when questioned closely. Kindly follow up with them, under information to me. I will be complaining to the Advertising Council, regarding such advertising.”"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached Magic Bricks Reality Services Limited for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. Magic Bricks Reality Services Limited was granted an extension of five days to the standard lead time to submit their reply in response to their request for extension. The Magic Bricks Reality Services Limited representatives did not seek a personal hearing that was offered and submitted their written response. The CCC viewed the website advertisement and considered the response from Magic Bricks Reality Services Limited. They states that the Website - www.magickbricks.com acts only as an Intermediary and the contents thereon are User Generated Content posted by the advertiser - Nausheen Real Estate on the Website. Magic Bricks Reality Services Limited states that the “advertiser” , has admitted that it was posted by mistake and have confirmed the deletion of the same from the listing. The CCC agreed that the advertiser in this case is Nausheen Real Estate and concluded that the property advertised of 2BHK Flat in Bangalore for Rs. 29.7 Lac, is false and misleading as the same currently does not exist and has already expired. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"Letv (Leeco)"
PRODUCT:"Lemax2"

COMPLAINT:

"“Advertisement is on their website http://in.lemall.com/in/product/lemax2/appearance.html Is Watch the bezels disappear Bezel-less design enters unchartered territory with Le Max2's triple anodic oxidation process to form an integrated whole - with no distinction between screen surface and phone exterior for a truly immersive viewing experience. i see advertisement on lemall website and i purchased le max 2 (Price 23000 is big money for me) but when I received i see that totally different in display which they show in their website it have approx 3 mm bezels its like i cheated by company by false advertise I make thread in leeco forum no company member reply see my thread http://forum.le.com/in/index.php?threads/le-max-2- watch-the bezels-disappear.12639/ and then i ask them through feedback but no reply see below link http://bug.letv.com/in/ue/feedback/detail/A2016TE607WFD07 and i also start a chat conversion with site admin but no reply of my message. they show 100 % fake advertisement why they not been charged for this I asking for fine. please help me thanks"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. The advertiser was granted an extension of five days to the standard lead time to submit their reply in response to their request for extension. The Advertiser was also offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the extended due date. The CCC viewed the website advertisement and in the absence of specific comments from the advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claims “Watch the bezels disappear Bezel-less design enters unchartered territory with Le Max2's triple anodic oxidation process to form an integrated whole - with no distinction between screen surface and phone exterior for a truly immersive viewing experience” read along with the visual of the product with no bezels is false and misleading, as it did not resemble the actual product provided to the Complainant that has bezels. The website advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"Biotique"
PRODUCT:"Biotique Bio Kelp Shampoo"

COMPLAINT:

"1. Clinically tested 2. 97 percent reported thicker, fuller, stronger and faster growing hair 3. Thicker, fuller, healthier hair"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"Our Objection- 1. Claims 1 and 2 talk about results from test. Was thetest done by an independent laboratory. Details about the test conducted need to be examined. 2. What is meant by claim 3 thicker, fuller, healthier hair. This is in comparison to what. 3. The clinical test says thicker, fuller, stronger and faster growing hair. How are they claiming healthier hair. Action to be taken- We propose that the advertisement should be immediately withdrawn”"

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claims, “Clinically tested”, “97 percent reported thicker, fuller, stronger and faster growing hair”, “Thicker, fuller, healthier hair”, were not substantiated with proof of efficacy for the product, and are misleading. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY: "Springfit Marketing Inc"
PRODUCT: "Springfit Mattress"

COMPLAINT:

"1. It belongs to the World collection 2. It is an OrthoLife mattress 3. The fabric is 3D Airtech 4. The foam used is re-active foam 5. The combination of features 2, 3 and 4 result in the weight being spread evenly across the mattress 6. The mattress promises ideal support for your back and a peaceful nights sleep for you"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"The print advt (copy attached) starts by saying: Introducing the range of Springfit Mattresses - world collection. The visual shows a cot and mattress with a glamorous looking woman beside it. The advt goes on to say-When it comes to your health, nothing less than the world collection will do. The OrthoLife Mattress comes with unique combination of 3D Airtech fabric, springs and re-active foam spreads weight evenly across the mattress, promising ideal support for your back and a peaceful nights sleep for you. Claims made about the mattress - 1. It belongs to the World collection 2. It is an OrthoLife mattress 3. The fabric is 3D Airtech 4. The foam used is re-active foam 5. The combination of features 2, 3 and 4 result in the weight being spread evenly across the mattress 6. The mattress promises ideal support for your back and a peaceful nights sleep for you Our queries- 1. What is the World collection the advt talks about. Details need to be given to indicate what is special about it. 2. Claims 2, 3 and 4 need to be explained. What is an OrthoLife mattress. What is 3D Airtech. What is reactive foam. Using these impressive terms in the advt without explaining them amounts to misleading consumers. 3. Can the company substantiate claims 5 and 6 by giving reports from independent agencies. Action to be taken- We propose immediate withdrawal of the advt."

Recommendation: UPHELD

""The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek a personal hearing and submitted their written response. Post review of the response, ASCI requested Advertiser was requested to provide more elaborate explanation on how the product provides the benefits as claimed in the advertisement. No response was received from the advertiser prior to the two days extension granted. The CCC viewed the advertisement and concluded that the claims, “Unique combination of 3D Airtech fabric, springs and re-active foam spreads weight evenly across the mattress, promising ideal support for your back and a peaceful nights sleep for you”, were not substantiated with technical data, test report, product specification details to prove uniqueness and are misleading. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. This complaint was UPHELD. The terminology “#worldcollection”, “OrthoLife” was not considered to be product claims and hence not objectionable. This complaint was NOT UPHELD.""

 

COMPANY:"KSL Digital Ventures Limited"
PRODUCT: "Roof and Floor"

COMPLAINT:

"I have come across advertisements that are misrepresenting the factual details of Real Estate Properties for sale uploaded on Roof and Floor website, where they physically do not exist as per specifications in the advertisement, and knowledge on which is being denied by the Builder's representative/Brokers/Agents who are listed therein. https://roofandfloor.com/bangalore/prestige-sunrisepark-electronic-city/pdp-jc?index=13&s=Y2l0eT1CY A couple of examples I have tracked are from a CREDAI-accredited Builder, Prestige Group, two of whose mis-represented/non-existent properties are listed among the advertisements. The first example is listed at Electronic City, Bangalore---for a 1 BHK, when Prestige has no one-BHK offering in their entire bouquet-- with contact listed under name Vijay Raj Sundar, His listed email This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. and his mobile number are correct though (based out of Chennai), who confirmed that he was an employee of Prestige Group, but denied any knowledge of the Advert insertion. He then diverted my call to his colleague by name Subh Ganguly at Bangalore (Mobile 9900025609), who claims that this Advert is not the responsibility of his Company ( the Builder, Prestige Group) as the advertising is not done on Prestige Website, despite details endorsed being that of an existing employee of Prestige Group. The second example of Prestige Group is listed as located at Kammanahalli/Banaswadi, Bangalore and is represented under the contact details of a broker named Arun, with mobile no listed as 9844740946, with EMail This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. representing PreProp Properties, who also denies details given therein. Screen shots and links attached below. I request that due-diligence be done before all such advertising is uploaded, unless cleared by the responsible company officially, as being physically available. I further request the Advertising Standards Council to take the above listing as a complaint, on deliberate mis-representation on Real Estate Properties in advertisements uploaded on this Web Portals peddling Real Estate Properties. I also humbly request the Hon Ministers of Consumer Affairs and Urban Development to take cognizance of this large scale mis-representation of Real Estate advertising deliberately indulged in, to mislead potential customers, and to specifically address this issue with suitable regulatory penal counter-measures, as this area witnesses a one-time life-savings investment made by a majority of our Citizens, unlike for Automobiles or for FMCG/Tooth-pastes. A copy of this complaint is also being endorsed to Hon Prime Minister separately, for attention to remedy this area through the ministries of the GoI. Link to advertisements (if not taken down by Roof and Floor/Prestige Group): "

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek a personal hearing and submitted their written response. The CCC viewed the website advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response. Advertiser states that Roofandfloor is an online property listing portal committed to providing comprehensive information to prospective buyers in order to facilitate their property search needs. As claim support data for the Prestige Sunrise Park project, the advertiser provided project brochure from the Builder (Prestige Estates Projects Ltd) which shows the masterplan where 1BHK units are displayed with 630 sq. feet area. The CCC did not consider the brochure alone as adequate substantiation for the claim made. The advertiser did not provide any other reliable and authentic evidence of the property being available as advertised. The CCC concluded that the advertisement regarding 1BHK Apartment Prestige Sunrise Park in Bangalore for Rs. 26.77 Lakhs, is false, misleading, and was not substantiated to prove that this offer is indeed available as advertised. The website advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the Code. This complaint was UPHELD. The property advertised of Prestige North Point Apartment for sale in Bangalore at Rs. 81.35 Lakhs, is false, misleading, and was not substantiated with supporting evidence to prove that this offer is indeed available as advertised. The website advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the Code. This complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY: "Jabong.com"
PRODUCT: "Under colours of Benetton trunks for men"

COMPLAINT:

“They have advertised on their website as pack of 2 but deliver only one and when questioned they say it's a technical glitch. Dear Sirs, They have advertised a product as pack of 2 and when delivered I received only one and when I questioned them they said it was an error and after putting up some resistance they refunded half the money in terms of a voucher. I asked them to correct it so that others are not misled but it's been 2 months now and they have still not corrected the so called error even after constant follow up with them and sending them screenshots regularly. I've written to their chiefmanager as well and all they say is that they are looking into it. I feel they just dont have the will to change it and are an arrogant company who despite agreeing that it's an error has not changed it in two months’ time.

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date for this complaint..The CCC viewed the website advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim, “pack of 2 Under Colors of Benetton Black Trunk Rs.459”, read in conjunction with the visual showing only 1 pc of the product advertised, is false and misleading by ambiguity. The CCC also noted that the name ‘Under Colors of Benetton’ is not the same as the company ‘United colors of Benetton’, hence this could also be a counterfeit/pass-off product. The website advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY: "Jagran Prakashan Limited"
PRODUCT:"Dainik Jagran"

COMPLAINT:

"1. No.1 Newspaper of India; 2. Touching / Reaching 100 Million Indians; 3. ASCI has certified it to be No.1 Newspaper in UP. 4. ABC has certified it to be No.1 Newspaper in UP."

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"“According to these advertisements, the claim is based on four source of information: - ABC (average circulation in UP) for Dainik Jagran July-Dec 2015; and - IRS 2012 Q4 TR, L1 W Listenership, Google Analytics May 2016 (UV’s – All Jagran Sites) Claiming - Touching 100 Millions hearts of Indians (10 crore Bhartiyon Ke Dil Ki Dhadkan) Nothing has been informed about: - How 100 million figures have been arrived at? - What are the products/services considered? - What is the source of information for figuring the Nos? - What are the nos for each such product(s) / service(s)? Without above facts, this is a false claim and misleading to public at large. Claiming - Audit Bureau of Circulations (“ABC”) and Advertisement Standard Council of India (“ASCI”) have certified DJ to be No. 1 Newspaper in UP. As per ABC policy, while approving a creative, ABC directs & advises the advertiser to specify competitor’s figures too including edition wise to make the campaign clear for the readers. However, no such comparison is given in the Advertisement. Para 4.4 of A Guide to ABC Audit, January 2016, issued by ABC states that, different Print Runs / Variant of the main paper distributed in the same market place are considered for combined certification. As per above guidance & according to ABC Audit Report Jul-Dec 2015, Amar Ujala is the No. 1 Newspaper in UP and ABC can not certify that DJ is No. 1 Newspaper in UP. DJ’s Ad mentioning ABC and ASCI as certifying authorities for its claim is absolutely false, wrong, misleading. Claiming - India’s No.1 Newspaper Is ASCI accepts the truthfulness of an AD if it is based on old survey. When IRS 2014 is out and available to the public and as per IRS 2014, DJ is not No.1 newspaper of India, how can DJ claim itself No. 1 Newspaper of India based on IRS 2012. This is a gross misrepresentation to readers and public at large.”"

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek a personal hearing and submitted their written response. Advertiser states that the claim of being No.1 in India is as per ABC Jul-Dec 2015 circulation figures where Dainik Jagran is ahead of Amar Ujala in UP, and the claim of touching 100 million Indians is based on the combined group reach of all Jagran Group’s Print, Radio and Digital businesses. The claim support data was reviewed by the technical expert of ASCI. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response as well as opinion of the Technical expert presented at the meeting. The CCC noted that the main issue circulation of Dainik Jagran is higher than that of Amar Ujala. It also commands higher readership both in IRS 2012 as well as the Amar Ujala-recommended IRS 2014. Based on this opinion, the CCC concluded that the claim (in Hindi), as translated in English, “No.1 Newspaper of India”, was substantiated. This complaint was NOT UPHELD. The advertiser has not explained the methodology used to support the claim of touching 100 Indians based on the combined reach of Jagran group’s print, radio and digital businesses. As the three figures are derived from different studies and audience bases, combined reach cannot be calculated by simple addition as they may not be mutually exclusive. The CCC concluded that the claim, “Touching / Reaching 100 Million Indians”, was inadequately substantiated and is misleading by exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the Code. This complaint was UPHELD. The claim, “ASCI has certified Dainik Jagran to be No.1 Newspaper in UP”, is misleading as ASCI is not a certifying body, and they have not given permission to use their name in the advertisement. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.3 and I.4 of the Code. This complaint was UPHELD. The claim, “ABC has certified it to be No.1 Newspaper in UP”, was not substantiated with supporting evidence such as ABC certification supporting the claim as it appears in the advertisement, and is misleading. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the Code. This complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY: "Nivea India Pvt. Ltd"
PRODUCT:"Nivea Whitening Cell Repair Body Lotion"

COMPLAINT:

“Tan Free Skin just in 2 weeks.”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The Advertiser did not respond prior to the due date. In response to ASCI Reminder seeking for their comments on the complaint, the advertiser provided a softcopy of the print advertisement and the details of the Ad. Agency handing their account and informed that the advertisement has been discontinued. The CCC viewed the advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response. The CCC concluded that the claim (in Hindi) as translated in English, “Tan Free Skin just in 2 weeks”, was not substantiated with proof of efficacy for the product, and is misleading. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY: "D P R Charitable Trust"
PRODUCT: "VITS College of Engineering"

COMPLAINT:

“VITS No.1 From Last 15 Years”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim (in Hindi), as translated in English, “VITS No.1 From Last 15 Years”, was not substantiated with comparative data versus other similar institutes or any third party validation or research to prove this claim over the last 15 years , and is misleading by exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY: "Galaxy Global Group of Institutions"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“Ranked No.1 Engineering College of Haryana” “Upto Rs. 15 Lakh Package p.a.”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim, “Ranked No.1 Engineering College of Haryana”, was not substantiated with supporting data such as comparative data versus other similar institutes, or any third party validation or research to prove this claim, and is misleading by exaggeration. Also, the claim was not qualified to mention the year and source of ranking and category under which the school was ranked in the survey. The claim, “Upto Rs. 15 Lakh Package p.a.”, was not substantiated with evidence to prove that the students have availed the claimed salary packages, and the claim is misleading by exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1, I.2 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY: "Alliance Solutions"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“Get 100% Job”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the concerned Media (Gujarat Samachar) for their assistance in providing the contact details of the advertiser, or to forward the grievances of the complainant to the advertiser. The CCC noted that no response was received from the advertiser or from the concerned media prior to the due date. The CCC viewed the print advertisement. In the absence of response from the concerned media and comments from the advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim, “Get 100% Job”, was not substantiated with supporting data (such as batch size of their students, detailed list of students who have been placed through their Institute, contact details of students for verification, enrolment forms and appointment letters received by the students), nor any independent audit or verification certificate and the claim is misleading by exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY: "Oriental Group of Educational Institutions"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“Best Hotel Management Institute Award From The Govt. Of Kerala For The Seventh Time”, and “100% Placement Record”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the advertisement. Advertiser did not provide any evidence or supporting data for the claims made. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim, “Best Hotel Management Institute Award From The Govt. Of Kerala For The Seventh Time”, was not substantiated with details, references of the award received such as the year, source and category. The claim is misleading by omission of a disclaimer to qualify the claim. The claim, “100% Placement record”, was not substantiated with authentic supporting data such as detailed list of students who have been placed through their Institute, contact details of students for verification, enrolment forms and appointment letters received by the students, nor any independent audit or verification certificate, and is misleading by exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1, I.2 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY: "Vishaka Study Circle"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“You Learn 100% or get Back Fee”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the concerned Media (Eenadu) for their assistance in providing the contact details of the advertiser, or to forward the grievances of the complainant to the advertiser. The CCC noted that no response was received from the advertiser or from the concerned media prior to the due date. The CCC viewed the print advertisement. In the absence of response from the concerned media and comments from the advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim, “You Learn 100% or get Back Fee”, was not substantiated with supporting evidence of students learning successfully or getting their fees back as advertised, and the claim is misleading by exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"Gobindapur Polytechnic College"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“100% Placement”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim, “100% Placement”, was not substantiated with authentic supporting data such as detailed list of students who have been placed through their Institute, contact details of students for verification, enrolment forms and appointment letters received by the students, nor any independent audit or verification certificate. Also, the claim is misleading by exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY: "Koneru Lakshmaiah Education Foundation (K. L University)"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"1. “100% Placement” 2. “1st Rank among Andhra Pradesh Engineering Institutes”"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim, “100% Placement”, was not substantiated with authentic supporting data such as detailed list of students who have been placed through their Institute, contact details of students for verification, enrolment forms and appointment letters received by the students, nor any independent audit or verification certificate. Also, the claim is misleading by exaggeration. The claim, “1st Rank among Andhra Pradesh Engineering Institutes”, was not substantiated with supporting comparative data versus other similar institutes, nor any independent audit or verification certificate and is misleading. Also, the claim is not qualified to mention the year and source of ranking and category under which the school was ranked 1st among other similar institutes. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1, I.2 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY: "Mahamaya Industrial Training Centre"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“100% Placement”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim, “100% Placement", was not substantiated with authentic supporting data such as detailed list of students who have been placed through their Institute, contact details of students for verification, enrolment forms and appointment letters received by the students, nor any independent audit or verification certificate. Also, the claim is misleading by exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY: "Sri Shakthi Institute of Engineering & Technology Campus"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“100% Placement Achieved - Consecutively for 3 years in 2014, 2015 & 2016 for all Sri Shakthians who opted for placement.”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim, “100% Placement Achieved - Consecutively for 3 years in 2014, 2015 & 2016 for all Sri Shakthians who opted for placement”, was not substantiated with relevant data (such as detailed list of students who have been placed through their Institute over the last three years, contact details of students for verification, enrolment forms, the batch size of the students per year, and appointment letters received by the students) nor any independent audit or verification certificate. The advertisement did not indicate the batch-wise details of the students. Also, the claim is misleading by exaggeration as well as ambiguity with the wording “…who opted for placement”. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY: "Centre for Bioinformatics"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“100% Placement.”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date for this complaint. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim, “100% Placement”, was not substantiated with supporting data such as detailed list of students who have been placed through their Institute, contact details of students for verification, enrolment forms and appointment letters received by the students, nor any independent audit or verification certificate. Also, the claim is misleading by exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY: "Jay Pranav Ayurvedic Pharmaceuticals"
PRODUCT:"Body Plus Capsules"

COMPLAINT:

"1. “Increase Appetite 2. “Gain Weight”"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date for this complaint. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claims (in Hindi), as translated in English, “Increase Appetite”, and “Gain Weight”, were not substantiated with proof of efficacy of the product and any clinical eveidence and are misleading. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY: "Shri Ram Hospital"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“Successful Treatment of Piles, Fissure, Fistula”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date for this complaint. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claims (in Hindi), as translated in English, “Successful Treatment of Piles, Fissure, Fistula”, was not substantiated with clinical evidence, and is misleading. Also, specific to the claims related to successful treatment for Piles, the Ad is in Breach of the law as it violated Schedule J of The Drugs and Cosmetic Act, 1940 and Rules, 1945. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1, I.4 and III.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY: "Chetan Clinic"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"1. Sex Problems? Get Successful Treatment with Ayurvedic Medicines 2. Now You too can Enjoy Married Life to your Heart’s Content"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date for this complaint. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claims (in Hindi), as translated in English, “Sex Problems? Get Successful Treatment with Ayurvedic Medicines”, was not substantiated with clinical data and is misleading. Also, specific to the claims related to successful treatment for sex problems, and the claims, “Sex Problems? Get Successful Treatment with Ayurvedic Medicines” and “Now You too can Enjoy Married Life to your Heart’s Content”, read in conjunction with the advertisement visual implies enhancement of sexual pleasure, which is in Breach of the law as it violated The Drugs & Magic Remedies Act. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1, I.4 and III.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY: "Air Asia India Limited."
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"1. “World's Airline Winner Skytrax Awards 2015 2. “World's Best Low-Cost Airline 7 Years Running”"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim, “World's Airline Winner Skytrax Awards 2015”, was not substantiated with supporting proof. Also, the claim is not qualified to mention the source and date of reference and the category under which the airline was given the award. The claim is misleading by ambiguity and omission. The claim, “World's Best Low-Cost Airline 7 Years Running”, was not substantiated with comparative data versus other similar airlines over the lst seven years, or any third party validation or research to prove this claim. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1, I.2 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. This complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY: "Anupama Ayurvedic Drug Co."
PRODUCT:"Arish Tanclear Range"

COMPLAINT:

“India's most trusted brand”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim, “India’s most trusted brand”, was not substantiated with comparative data versus other similar brands in the same category. The claim is not qualified to mention the source and date of research and criteria for assessment for the claim made. Also, the claim is misleading by ambiguity and omission. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1, I.2 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. This complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"Nurture Health Care"
PRODUCT: "Ayurex S Capsule"

COMPLAINT:

“1. For Men Only 2. Vitality Capsules 3. Difference Guaranteed 4. In the Times of Happiness for Extra Pleasure”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date. Subsequently, the advertiser responded informing that the said advertisement has been modified. The CCC viewed the print advertisement. In the absence of specific comments with respect to the claims made, the CCC concluded that the claims (in Hindi), as translated in English, “For Men Only”, “Vitality Capsules”, “Difference Guaranteed”, “In the Times of Happiness for Extra Pleasure”, were not substantiated with product efficacy data and are misleading. Also, these claims related to the product benefit read in conjunction with the advertisement visual imply that the product is meant for enhancement of sexual pleasure, which is in Breach of the law as it violated The Drugs & Magic Remedies Act. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1, I.4 and III.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY: "Divine Care"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"1. Permanent End To Pain 2. No pain, No Surgery , No Diet, No Side Effect"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claims, “Permanent End To Pain” and “No pain, No Surgery , No Diet, No Side Effect”, were not substantiated with clinical evidence, and are misleading. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. This complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY: "Zenlabs Ethics Ltd"
PRODUCT:"Zenovit Soft Gel"

COMPLAINT:

“No 1 brand in its category”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim, “No 1 brand in its category”, was not substantiated with comparative data versus other similar brands in the same category or any third party validation or research to prove this claim. The claim is not qualified to mention the source and date of research and criteria for assessment for the claim made. Also, the claim is misleading by ambiguity and omission. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1, I.2 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. This complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY: "Jippo African Capsule and African Oil"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"1. 100% Ayurvedic, No Side Effects 2. 100% Satisfaction Guaranteed. 3. Men can use capsule and oil for better results 4. Amateurs can also use and see effects"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"Violation under The Drugs and Magic Remedies (Objectionable Advertisements) Act, 1955"

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the concerned Media (Dainik Bhaskar) for their assistance in providing the contact details of the advertiser, or to forward the grievances of the complainant to the advertiser. The CCC noted that no response was received from the advertiser or from the concerned media prior to the due date. The CCC viewed the print advertisement. In the absence of response from the concerned media and comments from the advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claims (in Hindi), as translated in English, “100% Ayurvedic, No Side Effects”, “100% Satisfaction Guaranteed”, “Men can use capsule and oil for better results”, “Amateurs can also use and see effects”, were not substantiated with product efficacy data and are misleading. Also, these claims related to the product benefit read in conjunction with the advertisement visual and the pack visual implies that the product is meant for enhancement of sexual pleasure, which is in Breach of the law as it violated The Drugs & Magic Remedies Act. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1, I.4 and III.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"Green Rev Agro Pvt Ltd"
PRODUCT:"Zero Sugar"

COMPLAINT:

"1. Balances blood sugar & lowers your blood pressure 2. Improves immunity"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek a personal hearing and submitted their written response. The CCC viewed the advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response. As claim support data, the advertiser provided website references which were not considered to be authentic sources. The CCC noted that the references provided were of studies on rats and data was only indicative. One of the references states that this research is preliminary, and the FDA-approved forms of stevia for use in food do not contain stevioside, so most of the stevia products will not have any effect on blood sugar levels. The CCC concluded that the claims, “Balances blood sugar & lowers your blood pressure”, “Improves immunity”, were not substantiated and are grossly misleading. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"VKS Verve Nectars Pvt Ltd"
PRODUCT: "bgood Honey"

COMPLAINT:

"i) “Keep you young ii) Reduce Weight, Extra fat iii) Increase Immunity Power iv) Good for child brain growth.”"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek a personal hearing and submitted their written response. As claim support data, the advertiser provided review article references and some scientific literature. The claim support data was reviewed by the technical expert of ASCI. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response as well as opinion of the Technical expert presented at the meeting. The CCC noted that Honey is known to have therapeutic properties of varied nature. The claims might be partially applicable when honey is used with other herbal / natural medicines, or under specific conditions or along with life style changes. These, if claimed of a Branded Food Product like Honey needs substantiation. The CCC concluded that the claims (in Malayalam), as translated in English, “Keep you young”, “Reduce Weight, Extra fat”, “Increase Immunity Power”, “Good for child brain growth”, were not adequately substantiated for the advertised product with evidence of product efficacy, and are misleading. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"PepsiCo India Holdings P. Ltd"
PRODUCT: "Tropicana Litchi Delight"

COMPLAINT:

"TROPICANA LITCHI DELIGHT - The product pack says ""Litchi Delight"", shows dominant image of Litchi with a subdued image of apple in the background. Then says ""no added preservatives"", ""fruit beverage"". When reading the list of ingredients, we see ""water, sugar, concentrated apple juice 3.2% and Litchi Pulp 1.8%, acidity regulator and stabilzer"" .It is also confusing to note that you also say ""apple and litchi fruit juice content 22%"" - what to believe? Your information is misleading on many grounds. Afterall 1.8% of 200 ml is just 3.6ml of actual litchi fruit juice and you call it Litchi Delight where apple juice is 6.4ml, which is more - though both are in trace quantities. Secondly this is combo juice. Then there is acidity regulator, stabilizer, synthetic food color and added flavor. On the cover you say ""no added preservatives"" and ""fruit beverage"" but in reality, it is water flavored with chemicals and preservatives with minute traces of fruit juice - absolute manipulation of customers. Don't give any smart reply. Correct yourself, be transparent to customers."

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The advertiser representatives were given personal hearing by ASCI. The CCC viewed the product packaging and considered the Advertiser’s response. Advertiser states that the product is designed in such a manner that it promises and delivers a delightful experience of the Litchi fruit juice and not of Apple juice by using combination of ingredients like sugar, flavours and others and the product is blended juice with fruits Litchi and Apple. On reviewing the product submitted by the advertiser, the CCC observed that the product predominantly delivers the taste of apple juice. The CCC noted that the list of ingredients on the pack mention concentrated apple juice 3.2% and Litchi Pulp 1.8%, which means the apple content is more than litchi. The name “Litchi Delight” is inconsistent with the content of the product. The product pack says Litchi Delight and shows dominant image of Litchi with a subdued image of apple in the background, which is misleading. The CCC concluded that the product packaging contravened Chapter I.4 of the ASCI Code and Clause 8 of the Guidelines on Advertising of Foods & Beverages (“Claims in advertisements should not be inconsistent with information on the label or packaging of the food or beverage.”). The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"Dr. Bhavana Shah Fitness Care Pvt. Ltd"
PRODUCT:"Fat Freeze"

COMPLAINT:

"“Worlds Best Waist Reduction Treatment” “Latest And Fastest Technology”"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"This Advt of Dr Bhavna Shah Fitness highway is misleading the readers due to following reasons. 1- It claims, that FAT FREEZE is the WORLDS BEST WAIST REDUCTION TREATMENT. ADVANCED, LATEST AND FASTEST TECHNOLOGY. This is a very big claim, made by them, and it appears to be untrue. There is no mention of any supporting document for their claim.I have previously also submitted compliant about misleading advt of this firm. I recieved an email from ASCI on 10th June, that the complaint was UPHELD. But on checking the press release of ASCI and on checking the Update on GAMA website, i come to know, that NO ACTION WAS TAKEN AGAINST THE ADVERTISER, so they are continuing with the Misleading Advt, As Before. Kindly look in the matter and the working of ASCI also.”"

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. The Advertiser requested for informal resolution of the complaint but they did not complete the formalities prior to the extended due date for the same. Therefore the complaint was processed for CCC deliberations. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response wherein they indicate that the advertisement would be modified. In the absence of any claim support data, the CCC concluded that the claims, “Worlds Best Waist Reduction Treatment” and “Latest And Fastest Technology”, were not substantiated and are misleading by exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"Voltas Ltd"
PRODUCT:"Voltas All Star A/C"

COMPLAINT:

"1. “You can Run 2 ACs at the cost of 1 (i.e. use 2 of an ordinary brand).” 2. “This AC has a steady compressor which does not get cut off like in the case of other ordinary ACs.” 3. “Using this AC leads to Less Load and More Savings.”"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"Our Objection: 1. The claim that you can Run 2 ACs at the cost of 1 needs to be substantiated with data from independent studies. 2. What is special about its compressor that it ensures uniform cooling, is energy efficient and doesnt get cut off? 3. How is high ambient cooling achieved? Is this quality unique to this brand? If not, then the claim is misleading by omission. We propose immediate withdrawal of the advertisement."

Recommendation: UPHELD

"On receiving the CCC’s recommendation, requested a Review of the CCC recommendations. The advertiser representatives did not seek a personal hearing and submitted their response for Review. As claim support data, the Advertiser provided Technical Lab Report on the Operating Principle of Steady Cool Compressor in Voltas All Star Inverter AC. The claim support data was reviewed by the technical expert of ASCI. The CCC viewed the TVC and considered the Advertiser’s response as well as opinion of the Technical expert presented at the meeting. In support of their claim, the advertiser provided two data slides from an Internal Lab Test and it refers their internal lab is an NABL certified lab. The two data slides were therefore admitted and treated as raw technical data. They did not provide a formal test report disclosing the test methodology, test conditions, details of the results, and conclusions. Discrepancies were observed in the data presented on these graphs in terms of lack of details regarding the units of measurement. However, the graphs do give a qualitative indication of the steady nature of the current drawn by the variable-speed compressor as against the cut-in cut-out nature of the conventional compressor thereby indicating that the claim of having a variable Speed compressor, which runs on DC Inverter technology, is likely to be correct. Based on this observation, the claim “This AC has a steady compressor which does not get cut off like in the case of other ordinary ACs” was not considered to be objectionable. This complaint was NOT UPHELD on review. However advertiser needs to provide correct technical data in quantitative terms of Amperes. In absence of such technical details, the CCC concluded that the claim, “Using this AC leads to Less Load and More Savings”, was inadequately substantiated. The TVC contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The decision of complaint being Upheld stands on Review."

 

COMPANY:"Vini Cosmetics Ltd"
PRODUCT:"White Tone Powder"

COMPLAINT:

"The TV commerical of SPIZ BB Talc first came on TV and then White tone started advertising in TV on 6 th June 2016. The TV Commercial is in violation of chapter IV (3) of The code for Self Regulation in Advertising . ""Advertisements shall not be similar to any other advertisers earlier run advertisements in general lay our , copy, slogans, visual presentations, music or sound effects, so as to suggest plagiarism.”"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Recommendation: UPHELD

"On receiving the CCC’s recommendation, the agency contact representing the advertiser sought a personal hearing. The Advertiser also submitted their response for review. As claim support data, the Advertiser referred to their advertisement that was first run in June 2014 showing the format of two girls speaking in front of the mirror as an evidence for prior use of the concept, which they are now using in their current Ad. Advertiser states that the music, dialogues and benefit claims are different as compared to the complainant’s TVC and they have been using the benefit claims like Even Tone, Oil Free Look etc ... since June 2014. The CCC viewed the TVC of the complainant and the TVC of the advertiser and considered the Advertiser’s response for Review. The CCC noted that the models shown in the advertiser’s earlier run TVC are quite different in the age profile shown and hence, can not be considered as prior use of the concept in the current TVC under complaint. The CCC concluded that the Advertiser’s TVC was similar to the complainant’s earlier run advertisement in general layout, copy, visual presentations, execution, demographics, and colour scheme, so as to suggest plagiarism. The TVC contravened Chapter IV.3 of the Code. The decision of complaint being Upheld stands on Review."

 

COMPANY:"Aero Club Private Limited"
PRODUCT:"Woodland Shoes & Apparels"

COMPLAINT:

"“Flat 40% off VAT will be charged at applicable rates on discounted prices”."

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"The advertisement released by ProPlanet on the 2nd July 2016 claims on 40% Flat discount with a fine note stating 'VAT will be charged at applicable rates on discounted prices'. As per the sales person, while the MRP mentioned already includes VAT, the seller charges an additional VAT, thus making the FLAT 40% discount as a fraudulent marketing gimmick, and the net discount is only to the tune of 31%”"

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The advertiser was granted an extension, as an exception, to the standard lead time to submit their reply in response to their request and were also offered a personal hearing. The Advertiser submitted their written response through their Advocates and submitted the same through their representative. Advocate states that value added tax like sales tax is payable on every sale on the sale price, and the moment a discount scheme is floated the ultimate price becomes much lesser than MRP. They also provided a copy of Chattisgarh judgement in respect of a similar complaint received against the advertiser, and copy of similar Ads of other advertisers. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response. The CCC concluded that the claim, “Flat 40% off” announces discount on MRP. MRP includes all taxes and also is inclusive of VAT. Based on the calculations provided by the complainant, the net discount being offered works to only 31%. The CCC concluded that the “Flat 40% off” claim is misleading by ambiguity as the discount is being calculated on a reference price which is inclusive of VAT and VAT is in any case being added post discount. With respect to the disclaimer in the advertisement, the CCC was of the view that a disclaimer should not attempt to correct a misleading claim made in an Advertisement. The advertisement contravened Chapter I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"Bookaddda.com "
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"“Myself is Senior citizen having age about 70 years and wish to inform you that M/S. Book Adda.Com,13, 1st Floor, Palace Cross Road, Bangalore -560020 is displaying our book on his website with wrong price and information as below: Book Peadiatric Nursing by R.S.Tambulwadker with wrong price of Rs. 491 less 5 % off. i.e.Net Rs. 466/- as well as wrong information that book is out of stock. In fact the current price of our book is Rs. 240/- and it is available with us in ready stock. They are doing this to spoil reputation of our company as well as they misguide to people in large.. Mischief, bad conduct, Business Irregularity, bad intention Etc.. Their interest is to damage our companys name as well as value of our product by displaying wrong information on their website. Further we have sent our Regd letter dt: 13.06.2016 (copy enclosed) which was returned to us with remark LEFT This leads to doubt about their honesty. Xerox copy (copy enclosed) of returned envelope as well as copy of displayed of book on website is enclosed for your information. In this regard we would like to request you to please find the correct address of M/S.Book Adda.Com alongwith proper name of Proprietor or Partner name and you are requested to take necessary step against them so as to remove the wrong display of our books to further damage to us. In order to save further damage, kindly take necessary action and furnish the required detail at the earliest and oblige.”"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date for this complaint. The complainant provided evidence to show that Book Peadiatric Nursing by R.S.Tambulwadker bears the MRP of Rs. 240/- and it is currently available in ready stock with the author. The CCC viewed the website advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser and based on the information provided by the complainant, the CCC concluded that the price claim of “Rs. 491 less Discount Rs. 25 (5 % off) i.e. Net Rs. 466” and the claim that the “book is out of stock”, is false and misleading.. The website advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"Tata Sky Limited "
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"Tata Sky website displays their various base packages along with prices, which a subscriber can select or renew. They offer 3 options, either you pay for a month, semi annual or even on annual basis by selecting corresponding premium. The website link is given below: http://www.tatasky.com/wps/portal/TataSky/channels I renewed my pack on July 05, 2016 by paying them semi annual premium. It was natural to presume the pack will be renewed for 6 months under ""semi annual"" schedule & my renewed pack will be valid till Jan 04, 2017. I was wrong. The renewed pack expires on Jan 02, 2017 & not on Jan 04, 2017. When brought to the notice of their help line, Ms. Priyanka kindly explained to me today that it is renewed for 6 months, each month consisting of 30 days. So semi annual means 180 days, for them every month is 30 of days, be it Aug or Oct. They don't follow calendar month. I think they should not use misleading words like ""semi annual"" & clearly say ""for 180 days"" on their website. This is really confusing for all the subscribers. In the larger interest of general public I thought to bring it to your notice."

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek a personal hearing and submitted their written response. The CCC viewed the website advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response. Advertiser argues that the information provided on the Tata Sky Website is not in the nature of advertising but information on the kind of products/ services offered by them and their prices wherein they provide a facility to compare the various packages offered by Tata Sky and make an informed choice before subscribing to a pack of its choice. As per the CCC, ASCI code's definition of Advertising states that "Any communication which in the normal course would be recognised as an advertisement by the general public would be included in this definition even if it is carried free-of-charge for any reason." Therefore promotion via Website too is considered as Advertising and in ASCI’s purview. The CCC noted that the Tatasky website at the bottom of the page does state that a month is considered as 30 days. However, since the advertiser does not follow calendar month, the CCC concluded that the claim, “semi-annual” is incorrect and misleading by implication. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"Maharana Pratap Group of Institutions"
PRODUCT:"Maharana Pratap Dental College & Hospital"

COMPLAINT:

“No. 1 Dental College in U.P.”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"It’s an admission open for Maharana Pratap Dental College, in the courses of BDS and BPharm. In the ad the Group claims boldly that it’s No 1 Dental College. It sights some 2012 amar Ujala newspaper survey. How that survey, which was more a marketing initiative be sighted today. It misleads prospects to make wrong choice. Its deliberate cheating"

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the print advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claims, “No.1 Dental College in U.P.”, was not substantiated with comparative data versus other similar institutes in the same category or any third party validation or research to prove this claim. Also, the claim is misleading by exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"Bajaj Capital Ltd "
PRODUCT: "National Pension System"

COMPLAINT:

"This is an email on national pension plan. The sender name for the email was '"A GOVT. OF INDIA INITIATIVE" < This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. >'This was a misleading ad and the it was made to appear as though it was being sent by government of India , while infact it was a mail from Bajaj Capital. If you click on the mail it leads to the url http: //resources.bajajcapital.com/e-mailer/nps2015/index.php?campid=FI-NPS-GDSJAN16&source=affiliate."

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek a personal hearing and submitted their written response. The CCC viewed the Ad – Emailer and considered the Advertiser’s response. Advertiser states that the e-mailer promoted was on National Pension Plan and its content was developed by them. However, it was an inadvertent error from their vendors in dissemination of the e-mailer wherein they had used ""A Govt of India Initiative"" in the Sent From tab, instead of the advertiser’s name. The CCC concluded that the mention of ""A Govt of India Initiative"" in the emailer advertisement is false and grossly misleading as it is made to appear like a government advertisement. The emailer advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"Rao Pahlad Singh Group Of Institutions"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"“The school has mentioned that the RPSGOI is affiliated to CBSE delhi and mentioned the list of the five schools with address on its prospectus where as only The mahendergarh and Rewari campuses are affiliated to CBSE rest are not till this date which may be checked with CBSE website . Moreover the school has mentioned viz. 40 NDA selections in its pamphlet,94 AIPMT selections and so on which are fake and fictitious data, thus misleading innocent common people. On fee receipt it states that Affiliated to..........rest is left blank. Which comes under forgery. Kindly initiate An early action so that the students future is saved.”"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the Ad – promotional material. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claims, “40 NDA selections”, and “94 AIPMT selections”, were not substantiated with authentic supporting data, and are misleading. The claim, “affiliated to CBSE New Delhi”, was not substantiated with supporting proof, and is misleading. The data provided by the complainant establishes that not all schools in the group are affiliated to CBSE Delhi. The advertisement – promotional material contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"Manju Groups "
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"Attaching scanned pdf documents containing following details: page-1: Advertisement 1/5/2015 claiming CMDA approval page-2: Advertisement 2/1/2016 claiming CMDA approval page-3: CMDA letter stating no approval provided for the same. I want to report about untrue advertisement of Manju group published in Times of India newspaper on ""0105-2015."" and "".02-01-2016."". I have bought the house based on the advertisement. They have claimed the house is CMDA approved but on verifying with the local authority, it turned out to be false. I can provide documentary evidence for the same from CMDA. This has caused me lot of mental and financial hardship for more than one year with them and continuing. It is not professionalism on the part of newspaper to publish advertisement which is not true and deceiving innocent reader . If they are not able to verify the authenticity of content of the advertisement, they should indicate with clear disclaimer or warning to reader. I request you sincerely to act upon and prevent other readers getting deceived."

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the advertisement as well as evidence provided by the complainant that the CMDA has not approved the project. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim that the project is “CMDA Approved”, was not substantiated with supporting evidence. Also, the claim appears to be misleading. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"Enterr 10Televisions Pvt.Ltd (Bhojpuri Cinema)"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“Irrefutable Leader of UP, Bihar & Jharkhand” and “No.1 Bhojpuri channel in Uttar Pradesh, Bihar & Jharkhand”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"“We vehemently object to the said advertisement published by Bhojpuri Cinema, on the following grounds:- 1. Blatant violation of the “BARC India Ratings – Principles of Fair and Permissible Usage” guidelines dated 22.07.2015. Bhojpuri Cinema’s claim of being the “Irrefutable Leader of UP, Bihar & Jharkhand” and “No.1 Bhojpuri channel in Uttar Pradesh, Bihar & Jharkhand, is based on the BARC data for just one week (i.e. week 28’16). The BARC guidelines specifically provide that the following tests must be applied before making a claim of leadership: • The period of comparison must cover at least four consecutive weeks of data. • The period of comparison must cover at least four consecutive clock-hours of data. • The tabulations used must be direct outputs of BARC India’s BMW user interface. Any number derived by extrapolating or interpolating BMW outputs is not permitted for use in the public domain. The BARC guidelines defines the term “Commercial Use” as – “any use of BARC India data for supporting an appeal to viewers, advertisers or their designated agents and representatives”, and specifically mandates that for all commercial application of BARC data, the rules defined in the said guidelines must be strictly adhered to. It is explicit that the Advertisement in question neither passes any of the tests nor adheres to the usage rules, specified by BARC. 2. Contravention of Chapters I-1.1, I-1.3 and IV-4.1(b) of ASCI Code The Advertisement is not truthful in its letter and spirit. Further the subject matter of comparison should is chosen in such a way so as to confer an artificial advantage upon the advertiser. The above unfair trade practice adopted by the channel, undermines the credibility of BARC, misleads consumers and also harms the business interest of competitors.”"

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the website advertisement. In the absence of comments from the advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claims, “Irrefutable Leader of UP, Bihar & Jharkhand” and “No.1 Bhojpuri channel in Uttar Pradesh, Bihar & Jharkhand”, were not substantiated and are misleading. Advertiser has referred to BARC data as a source for their claims. The CCC noted that as per “BARC India Ratings – Principles of Fair and Permissible Usage” the period of comparison for any claim of leadership should cover at least four consecutive weeks of data. However, as per the disclaimer put by the advertiser for the claims is based on single week (week 28’16) and not four consecutive weeks of data as per BARC. Therefore it is violative of BARC Principles. The subject matter of comparison is chosen in such a way so as to confer an artificial advantage upon the advertiser so as to suggest that a better bargain is offered than is truly the case. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1, I.3, I.4 and IV.1(b) of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY: "Bluebird RO water purifier"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"1. What is meant by Alkarich water. Alkarich water needs clarification as common consumer won’t understand the meaning or significance. Is it unique to this brand. If not then it is misleading by omission. 2. The claim it gives water with alkaline and minerals which protects you from diseases and keeps you healthy and fit needs substantiation from independent data. 3. Are the alkaline and minerals added by bluebird. If no then the ad is misleading. Action to be taken - We propose immediate withdrawal of the advertisement...”"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

“Appeared on Zee News on 20.06.2016. Description of the Ad - The TVC features Anil Kapoor. Anil Kapoor is shown Jogging. He says - For good health we adopt habit of jogging and healthy eating habit. But all these efforts are wasted by your impure water. Get blue water purifier with Japanese technology which give you Alkarich water. It gives water with alkaline and minerals which protects you from diseases and keeps you healthy and fit.

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The advertiser was granted an extension of eight days to the standard lead time to submit their reply in response to their request for extension. The Advertiser submitted their written response. As claim support data, the advertiser provided lab reports with alkarich bluebird water purifiers, lab reports without alkarich bluebird water purifiers, literature on physiological effects of alkaline water, Mizu Water Test Reports and WHO Report of health risks of demineralized water. The claim support data was reviewed by the technical expert of ASCI. The CCC viewed the TVC and considered the Advertiser’s response as well as opinion of Technical expert presented at the meeting. The supporting data provided shows mineral content in drinking water as a desirable value. The term Alkarich Technology is adequately explained by the advertiser as having higher alkaline earth elements (magnesium and calcium) and the advertiser states that they have applied for the “Alkarich Technology Trademark”. Based on the documents provided by the advertiser, the CCC did not consider the terminology of “Alkarich water” to be objectionable. This complaint was NOT UPHELD. The internal measurement of water without and with Bluebird indicates addition of Minerals. While the advertiser states that they add the minerals in their technology, it is not clear how this addition is done and how long this addition can take place in the life of the device. There was no conclusive evidence to show how water richer in alkaline minerals provide protection from diseases. The claim, “it’s alkaline minerals protect you from diseases”, was inadequately substantiated and is misleading by ambiguity. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the Code. This complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"Sistema Shyam TeleServices Limited"
PRODUCT:"MTS"

COMPLAINT:

“Facing problem after recharging of 499/- data pack of mts mblaze no.8641870284 wb circle mts company told me that they should provide 9gb data instead of 5 gb data if I recharged before 27th June. Before recharging date, they frequently called me and sent a offer massage. But now they ignore.i lodge complaint several times but they close the complaint without solving this. Very worst feedback from them. They do not solve my problem. 3 times I lodge a complaint. But without solving they close my complaint”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek a personal hearing and submitted their written response. The CCC viewed the advertisement – SMS and considered the Advertiser’s response. Advertiser stated that the extra benefit/recharge advertised by them has been credited to the account of the complainant, and that the delay in credit was due to a manual error in update. However, the advertiser did not provide any supportings to confirm this receipt by the consumer. ASCI further requested the Advertiser for additional information to prove that the advertised extra benefit was availed by their other customers. In response to ASCI request, the advertiser provided a sample case of another offer advertised (“150% extra recharge with Rs. 159”), but the CCC noted that this did not address the query of Rs. 499 data pack. The CCC concluded that the claim, “80% extra recharge with Rs. 499 n get 9GB usage instead of 5GB for 28 days. Extra benefit credited within 72 hrs”, was not adequately substantiated with supporting evidence of the customers who have availed this offer. Also, the claim is misleading by exaggeration. The advertisement – SMS contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"Kerni Fitness Pvt Ltd"
PRODUCT: "Fitness Universe"

COMPLAINT:

“We offer a complete range of powders, capsules, bars, and drinks. These clinically proven, scientific nutritional supplements are developed through a six-stage research process that utilizer the expertise of leading nutritional scientists, doctors and universities.”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek a personal hearing and submitted their written response. As claim support data, the advertiser provided FSSAI License copy for marketing and manufacturing Food Supplements, Trademark Application Receipt (Proof of registered trademark), ROC Certificate (proof of registered company under company’s act 1956), and an analytical report of Whey isolate. The CCC noted that the advertiser did not submit the details of the product range, their individual composition as well as clinical research referred to in their advertisement, despite request from ASCI. The CCC concluded that the claims, “We offer a complete range of powders, capsules, bars, and drinks. These clinically proven, scientific nutritional supplements are developed through a six-stage research process that utilizer the expertise of leading nutritional scientists, doctors and universities”, were not substantiated with technical data, evidence of the six stage research process as well clinical research and are misleading. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"Narang Group"
PRODUCT:"Ocean Fruit Water"

COMPLAINT:

"1. Product name is Ocean Fruit Water 2. Bottle also shows apple flavour or guava flavour or mango and passion fruit flavour. 3. On the product bottle shown in ad it says- Glucose, Electrolytes, Vitamins 4. Ocean Fruit Water is Packed with fruit juice, electrolytes and vitamins to help boost your energy levels 5. Supers say-Contains fruit 6. Supers say- ready to serve fruit beverage"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"Print ad showing graphic - illustration of 3 bottles of Ocean fruit water in different fruit flavours with various messages on the ad. Our objections 1. Claims 3 to 6 should be substantiated with independent research data and certified by competent authority. 2. Product name fruit water is misleading by implication. Bottle says it is of a particular fruit flavor. Contradictory and misleading. 3. What does packed with fruit juice electrolytes and vitamins mean. What is the percentage quantity of each in package contents. Substantiation by independent and competent authority required. 4. Ready to serve fruit beverage implies a fruit juice beverage. Misleading. 5. How much fruit juice does it contain. Is it sufficient to make such claims. Please explain. Action to be taken- We propose that the advertisement should be immediately withdrawn."

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The advertiser representatives were given personal hearing by ASCI. As claim support data, the advertiser provided COA from the manufacturer, FSSAI License, Nutritional comparisons, RDA comparison for Vitamin & Electrolytes, Trademark Application, etc. The claim support data was reviewed by the technical expert of ASCI. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response as well as opinion of the Technical expert presented at the meeting. The advertiser argues that this product falls within the category of Ready to Serve Fruit Beverage under Regulation 2.3.10 of the Food Additive Regulations. For the same reason, the generic name ‘Ready To Serve Fruit Beverage’ has been indicated on the label of the Product. As per the advertiser, Ocean Fruit Water is their trade name for their fruit beverage and they have applied for Trade Mark of Ocean Fruit Water which is under process. Based on this information, the CCC did not find the product name “Ocean Fruit water” to be objectionable. This complaint was NOT UPHELD. The CCC noted that the product Ocean Fruit Water falls within the food category 2.3.10 (Thermally Processed Fruit Beverages / Fruit Drink/ Ready to Serve Fruit Beverages) under the FSSAI Additive Regulations. As per FSSAI standards it has a minimum of 10 percent fruit juice content so as to be classified as –Ready to serve Fruit beverage. Flavours added to the beverage are being declared both in the front panel and also in the principal panel as per FSSAI regulations. Therefore, the bottle showing mandatory declaration of “contains fruit”, ‘READY TO SERVE FRUIT BEVERAGE’ and declarations of “Apple flavor , Guava flavor and Mango and Passion fruit flavor” is not misleading. This complaint was NOT UPHELD. Advertiser has declared, in the ingredient list on the label, the quantity of Glucose, Electrolytes and Vitamins present in each 500ml of Ocean Fruit Water. While the CCC noted that these ingredients are present in the beverage, the adjective “Packed with” is misleading by exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Chapter I.4 of the ASCI Code. This complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY: "I.T.C. Limited "
PRODUCT: "Aashirvaad Sugar Release Control Atta"

COMPLAINT:

“"1. Low GI (glycemic index) 2. Natural grain mix in the atta ensures sugar levels do not rise suddenly 3. Keeps you active for a long time 4. Eat rotis without worrying about sugar levels 5. Taste and health together Our queries - 1. Has the atta been certified by a reputed independent agency as being good for diabetics. 2. What is natural grain mix. 3. How low is the GI of this natural grain mix compared to normal atta. 4. Is this low GI grain mix atta good for the entire family including children. 5. Claim 4 is dangerous and misleading. Even if the atta has a low GI rotis cannot be eaten by diabetics in excess. High intake of carbohydrates will ultimately increase sugar levels. 6. Can the company substantiate claims 1, 2 and 3 and 5 by giving reports from independent agencies."”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"Appeared on - Several TV channels like Kairali - Malayalam Sun TV - Tamil and On Youtube – Hindi https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qmUUGYVA2tY Language - Hindi Description of the TVC - Two women are shopping in a supermarket. Neha decides to buy a packet of sweets and puts it in her cart. Then, she has second thoughts and puts it back on the rack. When asked by her friend why she replaced the sweets, she says her husbands sugar levels are high so she is changing old habits. Her friend tells her to adopt a new habit as well by buying Aashirvaad Sugar Release Control Atta."

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The advertiser representatives were given personal hearing by ASCI. Advertiser states that the formulation of the Product has been tested at the Madras Diabetes Research Foundation and the report certified the Product to have a GI value of 53, a low- GI product. It is on the basis of the certification of the Madras Diabetes Research Foundation and references in scientific journals across the world that the Product is called 'Sugar Release Control Atta', wherein 'sugar release control' is simply a definition of a low-GI food itself. As claim support data, the advertiser provided information on GI primers, technical reports and Test report of Glycemic Index Testing Centre for Foods. The advertisers argues that the primary attribute of a low-GI product is, that the product will be slowly absorbed into the blood stream, resulting in a gradual rise in the blood sugar rather than a sudden spike. This will result in energy for a longer period than food that is quickly absorbed into the blood stream. The advertiser also states that the TVC does not make any statement that encourages people to consume an excessive amount of carbohydrates but tries to convey that for a given serving size, the low-GI Product results in sustained sugar release in a controlled manner without spikes of sugar levels in the blood stream which has its health benefits when compared to rotis made from moderate-GI whole wheat atta. The claim support data was reviewed by the technical expert of ASCI. The CCC viewed the TVC and considered the Advertiser’s response as well as opinion of the Technical expert presented at the meeting. The test report of Madras Diabetes Research Foundation has mentioned that the Ashirwad atta has low Glycemic Index. The CCC concluded that the claim, “Low GI (glycemic index)”, was substantiated. This complaint was NOT UPHELD. While the advertised product is portraying the benefit of low GI atta, the CCC observed that the graphical representation indicates the sugar release pattern of high GI food and the voice over states that the advertised product would not result in sudden spike in your sugar level. The CCC considered this and the product description of “Sugar release control” to be misleading by ambiguity and implication that the low GI atta has curative property in reducing the overall blood sugar level. The CCC observed that the TVC is set in the context of the protagonist’s husband having high sugar level. While the claim, “Natural grain mix in the atta ensures your sugar levels do not rise suddenly” holds for the sugar release from the atta based food, it is likely that the consumers would be misled into believing that the low GI atta would have beneficial / curative effect on sugar release of other High GI food that is ingested as well. The CCC noted that ordinary whole wheat atta is not high GI in the first place and hence is not likely to cause spiking of blood sugar level. Replacement of moderate GI value atta with low GI value atta does not necessarily mean that consumer need not worry about intake of total number of roties. The claim, “Eat rotis without worrying about sugar levels”, is misleading by ambiguity as rotis cannot be eaten by diabetics in excess. High intake of carbohydrates, even though low in GI value, will ultimately increase sugar levels. The TVC contravened Chapter I.4 of the Code. This complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"M.K.Agrotech Pvt. Ltd"
PRODUCT: "Sunpure Refined Sunflower Oil"

COMPLAINT:

"“A sunflower oil brand claiming Natural Oryzanol in it. To the best of our Knowledge The Oryzanol is present only in Rice Bran Oil, On what basis the brand is claiming to have same in Sunflower oil without any blend or fortification? which is not mentioned anywhere in advertisement. In ad the pack denotes Sunflower Oil.”"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim that Sunflower oil has “Natural Oryzanol”, was not substantiated with supporting technical data and is misleading. It was noted that Oryzanol is available in Rice bran oil and to claim presence of Natural Oryzanol in Sunflower oil, the manufacturer would have to mix Rice Bran Oil to Sunflower Oil. Such composition would make it “blended oil” and since the Oil does not say it is a blended oil, it is very unlikely that Oryzanol is included in the Sunflower oil. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"Sunnah Enterprises"
PRODUCT:"Barley Sattu"

COMPLAINT:

"1. Keeps your weight in control 2. Keep Protection from Sunlight and Heat 3. benefit in migraine 4. prevent obesity"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claims (in Urdu) as translated in English, “Keeps your weight in control”, “Keep Protection from Sunlight and Heat”, “benefit in migraine”, “prevent obesity”, were not substantiated with evidence of product efficacy, and are misleading. The CCC noted that the FSSAI number quoted in the advertisement (13815015000173) was an invalid number. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"Devyani Food Industries Ltd"
PRODUCT:"Cream Bell Ice Cream"

COMPLAINT:

“India's Most Promising Brand”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek a personal hearing and submitted their written response. The CCC viewed the advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response. Advertiser states that the product was awarded "India's Most Promising Brand" in 2014 in Food and Beverage category by World Consultancy and Research Corporation (WCRC). As claim support data, the advertiser provided a copy of the Certificate and photograph of the Trophy awarded. The CCC concluded that although the claim, “India’s Most Promising Brand”, was substantiated, the claim was misleading by omission of the mention of the specific product category, the year of receipt of award as well as source and date of research and criteria for assessment for the claim made. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.2 and I.4 of the Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"M.K Agrotech Private Limited"
PRODUCT:"Sunpure Sunflower Oil"

COMPLAINT:

"1. No TBHQ. 2. Large quantity of TBHQ in food may be harmful 3. Claims-Is misleading by implication that other products could have high TBHQ."

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: NOT UPHELD

"The ASCI had approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. The matter was examined by the CCC at the CCC’s meeting of CCC.13 on the basis of the advertiser’s response. The complaint was Upheld due to the absence of any technical evidence to prove absence of TBHQ. On receiving the CCC’s recommendation, the advertiser provided a copy of the TBHQ test report from a certified lab. The report shows that the sample of the refined sunflower oil does not contain tert-butylhydroquinone (TBHQ). The CCC viewed the print advertisement and reviewed the test report, and concluded that the claim, “Sunpure contains no TBHQ” was substantiated. The complaint is Not Upheld on Review."

 

COMPANY:"Amba Health Clinic"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

""1. Treatment to gain Weight 2. Stayed Development 3. Increase height or get your money back 4. Sure-shot Treatment of piles 5. Effective from the beginning, get cured in 60-90 Days 6. Nightfall, Premature Ejaculation, Sexual weakness in Men 7. Masturbation, Penis Disorders, Weakness in Nerves 8. You can get rid of loose thin and crooked Penis 9. Itchiness in your sexual Organs 10. Low Sperm Count 11. Ovarian Cyst 12. Leucorrhoea -White Discharge 13. Sagging of Sexual Organs 14. Lack of Sexual Desire 15. Irregular Periods 16. Make you small loose underdeveloped chest into a shapely, beautiful and attractive one 17. Enhance your Feminity 18. Improve Husband Wife Relationship" "

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek a personal hearing and responded post the due date, requesting for a copy of the complaint. ASCI informed the advertiser that a suo motu complaint has been registered and requested them to substantiate the claims. The CCC noted that the advertiser did not provide any claim support data or proof of efficacy of the treatment being offered. The CCC concluded that the claims (in Hindi) as translated in English, “Treatment to gain Weight”, “Stayed Development”, “Increase height or get your money back”, “Sure-shot Treatment of piles”, “Effective from the beginning, get cured in 60-90 Days”, “Nightfall, Premature Ejaculation, Sexual weakness in Men”, “Masturbation, Penis Disorders, Weakness in Nerves”, “You can get rid of loose thin and crooked Penis”, “Itchiness in your sexual Organs”, “Low Sperm Count”, “Ovarian Cyst”, “Leucorrhoea -White Discharge”, “Sagging of Sexual Organs”, “Lack of Sexual Desire”, “Irregular Periods”, “Make you small loose underdeveloped chest into a shapely, beautiful and attractive one”, “Enhance your Feminity”, “Improve Husband Wife Relationship”, were not substantiated with clinical evidence, and are misleading. Specific to the claims related to increase in height, and treatment for sexual diseases, the Ad is in Breach of the law as it violated The Drugs & Magic Remedies Act, 1954. As for the claims related to treatment for Piles, the Ad is in Breach of the law as it violated Schedule J of The Drugs and Cosmetic Act, 1940 and Rules, 1945. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1, I.4 and III.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"Kanpur Institute of Technology"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"1. “Awards & Honors - Rated As Best Engineering & Managment College In Uttar Pradesh” 2. “402+ Placements in 92+ Companies” The Names of the Awards Received for the Years 2013, 2014, 2015 are not Mentioned."

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek a personal hearing and submitted their written response post the due date. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response. Advertiser states that the National Education Excellence Award 2016 was granted by M/ s. Praxis Media Private Limited for being the ""Best Private Engineering & Management College in Uttar Pradesh"" in the year 2016. As claim support data, the advertiser provided a copy of this award certificate. The CCC reviewed the certificate and concluded that the claim, “Awards & Honors - Rated As Best Engineering & Management College in Uttar Pradesh”, was not adequately substantiated as the reference to “Private” was missing. Other certificates presented by the advertiser were certificates for the year 2013, 2014 and pertaining to Educational / Academic Excellence and could not be considered as support for the claim of the institute being the “Best”. Advertiser did not provide any claim support data for the pictures shown in the advertisement of the award received by the advertiser for the year 2015. The CCC concluded that this claim was not substantiated. The advertisement was misleading by ambiguity and omission of the mention of the specific category as well as source and date of research for the claim made. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1, I.2 and I.4 of the Code. This complaint was UPHELD. As claim support data, for 402+ Placements in 92+ Companies, the advertiser provided a list of placed students along-with their contact email IDs. However, they did not share the contact details of any student for independent verification by ASCI despite request from ASCI. The CCC concluded that the claim, “402+ Placements in 92+ Companies”, was not substantiated with authentic supporting data (such as batch size of their students, enrolment forms and appointment letters received by the students), nor any independent audit or verification certificate, and the claim is misleading by exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. This complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"Leeford Healthcare Ltd"
PRODUCT:"Meglow Fairness Cream for Men"

COMPLAINT:

"1. Meglow Premium Fairness Cream: a. Get Radiant Fairness b. Get Spotless Face 2. Clinically Certified Formula 3. SPF 15 UVA 4. Pack Claim – “Mega Dose Of Skin Whitening Concentrate”"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek a personal hearing and submitted their written response. The advertiser provided product test report, and copy of Product Label, product composition and product approval. The claim support data was reviewed by the technical expert of ASCI. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response as well as opinion of the Technical expert presented at the meeting. The CCC noted that “Radiant fairness” essentially refers to emission of light from the skin, which has not been measured for the advertised product. “Spotless face” was considered to be an absolute claim and difficult to achieve for a fairness cream as spots of solar lentigo (sun induced moles), flat moles, polymorphous light eruptions cannot be removed with fairness cream. The CCC observed that the active ingredient in the cream could lighten skin to a limited extent; however can not be considered to be present in “megadoses”. The CCC noted that there is no evidence submitted to show that this product has SPF 15 or any UVA protection. Based on this assessment, the CCC concluded that the claims (in Hindi) as translated in English, “Get Radiant Fairness”, “Get Spotless Face”, “SPF 15 UVA”, and Pack claim, “Mega Dose Of Skin Whitening Concentrate”, were inadequately substantiated, and are misleading by exaggeration. While the advertiser presented a clinical study report, in the context of other claims being objected to, the claim “Clinically certified formula” was considered to be misleading by ambiguity and implication. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY: "Mohak Bariatrics and Robotics"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"1. “Indore Becomes the country’s Number 1 City for Freedom from Obesity” 2. “Created a New Record in surgery of Obesity” 3. “3 Research Consultant Team from TOI announced Mohak Bariatrics and Robotics to be Country’s Best Centre”"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek a personal hearing and submitted their written response. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response. Advertiser asserts that the claims made are based on evidence and documentary proof available with them, but no claim support data was submitted. The CCC concluded that the claims (in Hindi) as translated with English, “Indore Becomes the country’s Number 1 City for Freedom from Obesity”, “Created a New Record in surgery of Obesity”, “Research Consultant Team from TOI announced Mohak Bariatrics and Robotics to be Country’s Best Centre”, were not substantiated with supporting evidence, and are misleading by exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"Leeford Healthcare Ltd "
PRODUCT:"Meglow Fairness Cream For Women"

COMPLAINT:

"1. Get Radiant Fairness 2. Get Spotless Face 3. Clinically Certified Formula 4. Product Pack – “With UVA SPF 15”"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek a personal hearing and submitted their written response. The advertiser provided product test report and copy of Product Label, composition and product approval . The claim support data was reviewed by the technical expert of ASCI. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response as well as opinion of the Technical expert presented at the meeting. The CCC noted that “Radiant fairness” essentially refers to emission of light from the skin, which has not been measured for the advertised product. “Spotless face” was considered to be an absolute claim and difficult to achieve for a fairness cream as spots of solar lentigo (sun induced moles), flat moles, polymorphous light eruptions cannot be removed with fairness cream. There is no evidence submitted to show that this product has SPF 15 or any UVA protection. Based on this assessment, the CCC concluded that the claims (in Hindi) as translated in English, “Get Radiant Fairness”, “Get Spotless Face”, Pack claim– “With UVA SPF 15”, were inadequately substantiated, and are misleading by exaggeration. While the advertiser presented a clinical study report, in the context of other claims being objected to, the claim “Clinically certified formula” was considered to be misleading by ambiguity and implication. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"Rex Remedies Pvt Ltd"
PRODUCT:"Rex Dimaghi Brain Tonic"

COMPLAINT:

“Increases the memory, Gives Success”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"In response to ASCI letter requesting for comments on the Suo Moto complaint, the Advocates responded with an authority letter from the advertiser to grant personal hearing post the due date, and two days extension thereafter to submit the response. The advertiser was granted an extension of six days to the standard lead time to submit their reply as well as an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser’s representative Advocate states that the advertiser has informed that the contents of the complaint are not clear. The Advertiser was provided another opportunity to discuss their submission via tele-conferencing but they did not avail this opportunity. The CCC noted that the advertiser did not provide any claim support data nor details of product composition. In the absence of any product efficacy data, the CCC concluded that the claim (in Urdu) as translated in English, “Increases the memory, Gives Success”, was not substantiated with evidence of product efficacy, and is misleading by exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1, I.4 and I.5 of the Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY: "The Sharda Educational Trust"
PRODUCT:"Sharda University"

COMPLAINT:

“Awarded the Best Private University In India For 5 Years In A Row”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: NOT UPHELD

"The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek a personal hearing and submitted their written response through their representative Advocates. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response. As claim support data, the advertiser provided copy of awards granted to them by College2Campus (For years 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016). The CCC concluded that the claim, “Awarded the Best Private University In India For 5 Years In A Row”, was substantiated. This complaint was NOT UPHELD."

 

COMPANY: "Info Edge India Ltd - Shiksha.com"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“India's No.1 Career & College Selection Platform”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek a personal hearing and submitted their written response. While the advertiser initially opted for Informal Resolution of the complaint, they did not complete the formalities prior to the due date. Therefore the complaint was processed for CCC deliberations. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response. Advertiser did not provide any supporting data for the claim made and indicated that they would be modifying the advertisement. The CCC concluded that the claim, “India's No.1 Career & College Selection Platform”, was not substantiated with comparative data versus other similar institutes or any third party validation or research to prove this claim, and is misleading by exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"HCL Technologies Ltd"
PRODUCT:"HCL Training & Staffing Services Pvt Ltd"

COMPLAINT:

“Get an Assured Job at HCL Lucknow”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Recommendation: NOT UPHELD

"The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response. Advertiser states that all candidates who successfully complete the training and hiring program and clear all assessments, they will have an assured job in HCL. Candidates who fail or are unable to clear the training will be given another chance, however, if they are still not able to clear the assessments, they have an option to get the fees reimbursed. Based on the advertiser’s response, the CCC noted that this was a training program prior to selection subject to successful completion. There was no other evidence to indicate that the offered scheme is not honoured by the institute. The CCC concluded that the claim, “Get an Assured Job at HCL Lucknow”, was not misleading. The complaint was NOT UPHELD."

 

COMPANY: "Lovely Professional University"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"1. 100% Placements in MBA and Hotel Management. 2. Packages of over Rs.20 lac"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek a personal hearing and submitted their written response. Advertiser was granted a further extension of five days to submit batch size for MBA and Hotel Management Programs, the contact details of the students for independent verification. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response. As claim support data, for the claim, “100% Placements in MBA and Hotel Management”, the advertiser provided details of batch size, number of students registered and eligible, and number of students placed. For MBA- Out of a batch of 360 students, the advertiser considered 303 students to be eligible and placed. For Hotel management - of a batch of 80 students 60 students were found eligible and placed. Advertiser asserts that in both the programs, all eligible students who opted for placement have been placed. However, in absence of other requested information for verification of claims, the CCC concluded that the claim, “100% Placements in MBA and Hotel Management”, was not adequately substantiated with relevant data (such as evidence of batch size, enrolment forms, and appointment letters received by the students etc.) nor any independent audit or verification certificate. Also, the claim is misleading by ambiguity as the placement is subject to eligibility criteria. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. This complaint was UPHELD. For the claim, “Packages of over Rs.20 lac”, Advertiser states that the students have got international placements in US hotel industry and also in aviation sector. Advertiser provided offer letter of only one of their student placed with Hyatt Regency, USA wherein the Salary offered to him is in the range of $1600-$2500 per month, inclusive of gratuity. The CCC noted that the advertisement does not mention overseas placement or salary in Foreign currency whereas the advertisement refers to a package of over 20 lac. The CCC concluded that the claim, “Packages of over Rs.20 lac”, was not substantiated with evidence to conclusively prove that multiple students were offered the claimed salary packages, and also, the claim is misleading by ambiguity and implication that all salary packages would be above Rs 20 lac. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. This complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY: "Kukreja Institute of Hotel Management & Catering Technology"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“Rated No.1 Institute of North India.”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek a personal hearing and submitted their written response. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response. Advertiser states that the claim is basis an article published by Competition Success Review magazine listing "Top Hotel Management Institutes of India". The CCC noted that the list provided by competition success review is of top hotel management institutes of India. The said list is in alphabetical order (zone wise) as per the disclaimer in the magazine; and does not declare these as ranking. The CCC concluded that the claim, “Rated No.1 Institute of North India”, is false and is misleading ambiguity. Also, the claim is not qualified to mention the year and source of ranking and category under which the institute was qualified. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1, I.2 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY: "Sharda Education Trust "
PRODUCT:"Sharda University"

COMPLAINT:

1. “Awarded the best private university in India for 6 Years in a row. 2. Highest Package of Rs.54 lac Engineering”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek a personal hearing and submitted their written response through their representative Advocates. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response. As claim support data, the advertiser provided copy of awards granted to them by College2Campus (For years 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016). The CCC concluded that the claim, “Awarded the Best Private University In India For 6 Years In A Row”, was substantiated; This complaint was NOT UPHELD. The CCC recommended that the advertiser should indicate the source of this award in the advertisement. For the claim, “Highest Package of Rs.54 lac Engineering”, Advertiser states that there are many more students who work with national and International companies. As claim support data, the Advertiser provided only a copy of agreement where in one student was offered salary of $7500/- per month- overseas employment. The CCC concluded that the claim, “Highest Package of Rs. 54 lac Engineering”, was not substantiated with evidence to prove that the students have availed the claimed salary package, and the claim is misleading ambiguity regarding the overseas employment. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. This complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"The Third Eye "
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"1. 100% Money Back Guarantee. 2. Brain Course Activation 3. A child when Blindfolded can do the Following; - Identify Colors - Book Reading - Cycling - Skating - Play Chess - Reading Headlines of A Newspaper"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek a personal hearing and submitted their written response. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response. Advertiser states that their program is based on scientific method (Mid Brain Activation programme) - a combination of music, Yoga, Mediation and color therapy. The program is newly launched and the advertiser provided references of TV clips and YouTube links. Regarding the “100% money back” guarantee, the advertiser states that the intent is to provide money refund to those students who fail to learn the content of the programs. The CCC noted that the advertiser did not provide any authentic scientific evidence of the benefit of the program or any published scientific papers and also did not provide the details of students who were provided money back on failure to learn from the program. The CCC concluded that the claims, “100% Money Back Guarantee”, “Brain Course Activation - A child when Blindfolded can do the Following - Identify Colors - Book Reading - Cycling – Skating - Play Chess - Reading Headlines of A Newspaper”, was not adequately substantiated with supporting evidence, and are grossly misleading. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY: "Hans Worldwide Logistics"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“Last two batches (100%) placed in 30 days”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek a personal hearing and submitted their written response. While the advertiser initially opted for Informal Resolution of the complaint, they did not complete the formalities prior to the due date. Therefore the complaint was processed for CCC deliberations. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response. Advertiser provided names of 12 students (three in year December 2014 and nine in second batch) who were sent by them for training and they were absorbed by the respective firms. However, the Advertiser did not provide any supporting data for the claim made. The CCC concluded that the claim, “Last two batches (100%) placed in 30 days”, was not substantiated with relevant data (contact details of students for independent verification, their enrolment forms, the batch size of the students per year, and appointment letters received by the students) nor any independent audit or verification certificate. Also, this claim is misleading by exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY: "R N S Institute of Technology"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“100% Placement with Top Notch Companies for Internships & Placements.”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek a personal hearing and submitted their written response. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response. Advertiser asserts that the claim is based on facts and figures with regard to placement during the year 2015 and 2016. Advertiser did not provide any supporting data for the claim made. The CCC concluded that the claim, “100% Placement with Top Notch Companies for Internships & Placements”, was not substantiated with relevant data (such as detailed list of students who have been placed through their Institute, contact details of students for independent verification, their enrolment forms, the batch size of the students per year, and appointment letters received by the students) nor any independent audit or verification certificate. The advertisement is misleading by ambiguity as the placement is subject to eligibility criteria. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"Akbar Academy of Airline Studies"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"1. World Wide Top 10. 2. World's No.1 Travel Training Institute Internship In Major Airports. 3. World's No,1 IATA Authorised Training Centre. 4. 100% Job Assistance"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The Advertiser requested for a Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat prior to submission of their response. But they did not attend on the date and time suggested for the meeting. The CCC reviewed the print advertisements and the advertiser’s response that was received post the due date. For the claim, “ World Wide Top 10”, the Advertiser states that they were awarded Premier Circle Membership by IATA and this Premier Circle Membership is awarded by IATA to World Top 10 Authorized Training Centers. Advertiser provided IATA Certificate for the years 2013, 2014, and 2015. But did not provide Certificate for year 2016 (as advertised) despite ASCI request. The CCC concluded that the claim, “World Wide Top 10”, was not substantiated for the current year and is misleading by omission. Also, the claim is not qualified to mention the source and date of reference and the criteria under which the advertiser was given the award. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1, I.2 and I.4 of the Code. This complaint was UPHELD. Claim – “World’s No.1 Travel Training Institute Internship in major Airports” - Advertiser states that this claim is being used based on a Press Release dated May 28, 2014 issued by IATA. Advertiser provided MOU with Globe Ground India to provide industrial exposure to students of Academy, providing Internship on its Training Courses - 3 months internship as per (GGI MOU)., T&C for Job Project Work At Calicut International Airport, Permission Letter from Airport authority Of India, Trivandrum International Airport to permit 15 students for 1 month Training at the airport. However, no data of the actual internships availed was provided. The CCC concluded that the claim, “World’s No.1 Travel Training Institute Internship in major Airports”, was not adequately substantiated and is misleading by ambiguity due to reference to “Major airports”. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the Code. This complaint was UPHELD. Claim – “World's No. 1 IATA Authorised Training Centre” – Advertiser states that this claim is being used based on a Press Release. However no authentic evidence was provided in support of the claim. The CCC concluded that the claim, “World’s No.1 IATA Authorised Training Centre”, was not substantiated and is misleading. Also, the claim is not qualified to mention the source and date of reference. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1, I.2 and I.4 of the Code. This complaint was UPHELD. Claim – “100% Job Assistance” - Advertiser states that they are providing 100 % Job Assistance to enrolled Students and they are Conducting regular Recruitment Programs for Students who have completed their Courses. The CCC concluded that while the institute may be providing job assistance, the use of “100%” numerical claim is not relevant for “job assistance” claim and it is misleading by implication. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapter I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"Jetking Infotrain Ltd"
PRODUCT:"Jetking Computer Education"

COMPLAINT:

"1. Join with jetking & get 100% job 2. India's no.1 computer hardware & networking institute 3. 100% job placement Guarantee 4. Limca Book of Record for 11,451 placements in one year 5. India's most Reliable institute award 2014 6. 100% Job Guarantee 7. Most Trusted Brand in Computer hardware training by the Brand Trust Report."

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek a personal hearing and submitted their written response. The CCC viewed the print advertisements and considered the Advertiser’s response. Claims, “Join with jetking & get 100% job”, “100% job placement Guarantee”, “100% Job Guarantee” - As claim support data, the advertiser provided some Job offer letters, student feedback letters, placement policy, placement undertaking signed by students, certificate of Limca Book of Records for highest placement by any vocational training institute in a year, Assocham India National Education Excellence Award 2015 for Best Vocational Training Institute. The CCC concluded that the claims, “Join with jetking & get 100% job”, “100% job placement Guarantee”, “100% Job Guarantee”, were not substantiated with relevant data (such as detailed list of students who have been placed through their Institute, contact details of students for independent verification, enrolment forms, the batch size of the students per year, and appointment letters received by the students) nor any independent audit or verification certificate, and the claims are misleading by exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. This complaint was UPHELD. Claim, “India's no.1 computer hardware & networking institute” – Advertiser provided Dataquest magazine report, Awards & Certifications such as Brand Trust Report 2014, Assocham India National Education Excellence Award 2015 and Indian Education Awards 2015 stating Jetking as leader in Category of Computer hardware and networking. The CCC observed that it is not conclusively proven that Jetking is India’s no. 1 as other institutes such as NIIT and Aptech appear to be above Jetking in these rankings. The CCC concluded that the claim, “India's no.1 computer hardware & networking institute”, was not substantiated with any award confirming its “No.1” status or with comparative data versus other similar institutes, and is misleading by exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. This complaint was UPHELD. Claim, “Limca Book of Record for 11,451 placements in one year” – Advertiser provided certificate from Limca Book of Records for the year 2011-12 confirming achievement of 11,451 placements making it the highest placement by any vocational training institute in a year. However the current year 2016 advertisement does not mention the year in which the award was received. The CCC concluded that although the claim, “Limca Book of Record for 11,451 placements in one year” was substantiated for year 2011-12, the claim is not qualified to mention the source and year of award. The claim is misleading by ambiguity and omission. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.2 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. This complaint was UPHELD. Claim, “India's most Reliable institute award 2014” – Advertiser submitted Certificate of the Brand Trust Report India Study 2014 – India’s most trusted Computer Hardware / Training institute in a study covering 20000 brands across 16 cities. The CCC concluded that the certificate is for the brand “Jetking being India’s most Reliable institute award 2014”. This claim is misleading. Also, the claim is not qualified to mention the source of research. There is a mismatch of text used in the award versus advertisement. Hence the claim is misleading by ambiguity. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.2 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. This complaint was UPHELD. Claim, “Most Trusted Brand in Computer hardware training by the Brand Trust Report” – Advertiser submitted Certificate of the Brand Trust Report India Study 2014 – India’s most trusted Computer Hardware / Training institute in a study covering 20000 brands across 16 cities. The CCC concluded that although the claim, “Most Trust Brand in Computer hardware training by the Brand Trust Report” was substantiated, the claim is not qualified to mention the year of the award. Also, the claim is misleading by ambiguity and omission of this being a 2014 data. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.2 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. This complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY: "Oshea Herbals "
PRODUCT:"Oshea Sunblock Cream SPF 40"

COMPLAINT:

"1. India's Most Trusted Brand Consumer Validated 2. With Oshea Herbals UVSHIELD get Tan Free Glowing Skin 3. SPF Range “SPF 20, SPF 25, SPF 30, SPF 50” 4. SPF 40"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek a personal hearing. The Advocate responded with an authorization letter from the advertiser to respond on their behalf. As claim support data, the Advertiser provided a copy of the product approval license. ASCI further requested for additional details such as Methodology followed for the choice of “Most Trusted Brand” Awards, List of other Brands that participated in the said Awards, legible copy of the certificate. As claim support data, advertiser provided survey data/India’s most trusted brand awards 2015/herbal skincare category and a copy of the certificate. The CCC viewed the advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response. The CCC noted that for the claim, ""India's Most Trusted Brand"" - there is a mismatch in the certificate provided by the advertiser and the survey report provided by IBC infomedia pvt ltd. The certificate states “Best Skin Care products” Category whereas the report mentions the category as “Herbal Skin care”. The CCC concluded that the claim is misleading by ambiguity and omission of mention of the specific category. Also, the claim is not qualified to mention the source and date of research. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1, I.2 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. This complaint was UPHELD. The claims, “With Oshea Herbals UVSHIELD get Tan Free Glowing Skin”, “SPF Range “SPF 20, SPF 25, SPF 30, SPF 50”, “SPF 40”, were not substantiated with evidence of technical evaluation for measurement of SPF factor in each product and proof of product efficacy and are misleading. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. This complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY: "German Homeo Laboratories Pvt. Ltd."
PRODUCT:"German Homeo Laboratory"

COMPLAINT:

"1. “Don't be upset, without side-effect use homeo treatment. 2. Our Speciality Treatment – Lack of Sex Desire, Arthritis, Piles, Fistula, White Patches, Psoriasis, Sterile, Women’s Problem, Obesity, Gastric Blood Pressure”"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek a personal hearing and submitted their written response. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response. In the absence of claim support data, the CCC concluded that the claims (in Bengali) as translated in English, “Don't be upset, without side-effect use homeo treatment”, “Our Speciality Treatment – Lack of Sex Desire, Arthritis, Piles, Fistula, White Patches, Psoriasis, Sterile, Women’s Problem, Obesity, Gastric Blood Pressure”, were not substantiated with clinical evidence, and are misleading. Specific to the claims related to treatment for sexual problems, with the headline “Unhappy married life/ unsuccessful married life” and the visual implying enhancement of sexual pleasure, the Ad is in Breach of the law as it violated The Drugs & Magic Remedies Act, 1954. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1, I.4 and III.4 of the Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY: "Women’s Centre "
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"1. “Best Women's Healthcare Centre in South India* 2. Comprehensive Women's Hospital of the Year (South India) 3. Asia Pacific’s Only Fibroid Centre”"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

""The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek a personal hearing and submitted their written response. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response. Claim, “Best Women's Healthcare Centre in South India*” is based on the award given by Praxis. The claim was substantiated. This complaint was NOT UPHELD . However, the CCC recommended that the advertiser is advised to mention the year of the award in the disclaimer. Claim, “Comprehensive Women's Hospital of the Year (South India)” is based on the award given by Brands Academy. However, there was a mismatch of the claim and the text in the award certificate which mentions “Best Dedicated Womens Hospital in South India”. The claim in the advertisement is not qualified to mention the date. The CCC concluded that the claim is not substantiated and is misleading by ambiguity and omission. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1, I.2 and I.4 of the Code. This complaint was UPHELD. “Asia Pacific’s Only Fibroid Centre” is based on the award given by Insightec. However, no details were provided for the background of the survey criteria for selection, other institutes that were assessed etc. The year for which the award is received is not mentioned in the certificate. The claim in the advertisement is not qualified to mention the source and date of the award under which the award was given to the institute. The CCC concluded that the claim is not adequately substantiated and is misleading by ambiguity and omission. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1, I.2 and I.4 of the Code. This complaint was UPHELD." "

 

COMPANY: "Muthoot Financial Enterprises."
PRODUCT:"Muthoot Finance Multiple Loans"

COMPLAINT:

“India's No.1 trusted Diversified Finance Brand”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: NOT UPHELD

"The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek a personal hearing and submitted their written response. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response. Advertiser states that the claim made is based on an award given to them by Brand Trust Report India study 2016 and Certificate by TRA Research Pvt. Ltd. As claim support data, the advertiser provided a copy of this award and Category wise All India listing. Based on this documents, the CCC concluded that the claim, “India's No.1 trusted Diversified Finance Brand”, was substantiated. The complaint was NOT UPHELD."

 

COMPANY: "S. S. Hospital"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“Successful Treatment of infertility in childless couples”, “The only Centre for High risk Deliveries”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek a personal hearing and submitted their written response. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response. Advertiser states the hospital runs an infertility clinic under supervision of a qualified doctor to provide best possible care to high risk pregnancy cases which no other hospital in their city has this level of infrastructure and round the clock specialists. However, in the absence of any evidence, the CCC concluded that the claim (in Hindi), as translated in English, “The only Centre for High risk Deliveries”, was not substantiated. Also, the claim “Successful Treatment of infertility in childless couples”, is in Breach of the law as it violated The Drugs & Magic Remedies Act. Also, these claims are misleading by exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1, I.4 and III.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"Kudos Laboratories India Limited"
PRODUCT:"Kudoos Range of Products"

COMPLAINT:

“1. 100 Years of Experience 2. In India 1st time untouched Ayurvedic medicine for Diabeties 3. Human Clinical Trial Tested 4. Kudos Active Slim Tea- Ayurvedic Yog, Helpful in weight control 5. Mixture of green tea, long pepper, work and other 10 ayurvedic medicines 6. Helps in Digestion process 7. Cure in Metabolism 8. Helps in weight reduce 9. Increase energy - gives stamina 10. Increase immunity - keep away from disease”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

""The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek a personal hearing and submitted their written response. The claim support data was reviewed by the technical expert of ASCI. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response as well as opinion of the Technical expert presented at the meeting. The advertiser states that the advertised product is a CCRAS [Central Council of Research in Ayurveda] product; provided to the advertiser through licensing agreement through NRDC (National Research Development Council). An agreement between CCRAS and Kudos allows Kudos to market the product under its brand name. The CCC noted that a definitive link between IME-9 and the AYUSH -82 is not provided and the clinical report submitted is not in full and some part in soft copy is not readable. Also, the advertiser did not provide any evidence to indicate that the claims being made in the advertisement have been approved by CCRAS / Ministry of AYUSH. Based on this opinion, the CCC concluded that the claims (in Hindi) as translated in English, “100 Years of Experience”, “In India 1st time untouched Ayurvedic medicine for Diabetes”, “Human Clinical Trial Tested”, were not substantiated adequately, and are misleading by exaggeration and implication. Specific to the claim of treatment and control of diabetes, the advertisement is in Breach of the law as it violated The Drugs & Magic Remedies Act. Claims related to Kudos Active Slim Tea “Helpful in weight control”, “Mixture of green tea, long pepper, work and other 10 ayurvedic medicines”, “Helps in Digestion process”, “Cure in Metabolism”, “Helps in weight reduce”, “Increase energy - gives stamina”, “Increase immunity - keep away from disease”, were not substantiated adequately with clinical evidence, and are misleading by exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1, I.4 and III.4 of the Code. The complaint was UPHELD." "

 

COMPANY:"Hindustan Unilever Ltd"
PRODUCT:"Clear Ice Cool Menthol Shampoo"

COMPLAINT:

“Keep you fresh for 24 hours.”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek a personal hearing and submitted their written response. The CCC viewed the TVC and considered the Advertiser’s response. Advertiser states that the product has been tested to provide 24 hours freshness and this benefit is validated through a quantitative consumer in home use test (blind product test), in November 2013. The claim support data was reviewed by the technical expert of ASCI. The CCC viewed the TVC and considered the Advertiser’s response as well as opinion of the Technical expert presented at the meeting. This consumer study tested three prototypes of Clear Menthol shampoo along with in-market benchmarks current Clear Shampoo and Head & Shoulders Cool Menthol. As per the research agency, 80% of the respondents who used the prototype 2 (YE65), either strongly agree or somewhat agree to the statement that “Unlike my regular shampoo, it gives me long lasting freshness for 24 hours”. However the CCC noted that, the claim is in comparison to another product and the advertiser did not provide data about the score that was obtained by the in-market benchmarks, especially Head & Shoulders Cool Menthol. Based on this opinion, the CCC concluded that the claim (in Kannada), as translated in English, “Keep you fresh for 24 hours”, was not substantiated adequately, and is misleading in absence of any criteria of comparison. The TVC contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY: "LAVA International Ltd (Teaser Lava)"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“The phone has gone through thousands of test”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: NOT UPHELD

"The CCC viewed the TVC and considered the Advertiser’s response. As claim support data, the advertiser provided list of in house tests carried out by them, total no of tests as per list is 89,415. Advertiser provided 5 Summary Test Reports - Charger Test Report, Data Cable Test Report, Earphone Test Report, Battery Data Sheet, and Product Reliability Testing Report. The CCC noted that the tests include each feature, accessory, applications as well as each activity performed. The CCC concluded that the claim, “The phone has gone through thousands of test”, was not objectionable. The complaint was NOT UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"Indoma Industries Pvt Ltd"
PRODUCT:"Little Home Air Cooler"

COMPLAINT:

“To utilize electricity worth just rs. 2 in the entire day.”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: NOT UPHELD

"The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek a personal hearing and submitted their written response. Advertiser states that the Cooler consumes 40 Watts of Electricity, and this being a residential product considers electric tariff which varies Rs. 1.80 to Rs. 6.00 per unit. Advertiser referred to a website link showing the electricity tariff slabs and rates for all states in India. The claim support data was reviewed by the technical expert of ASCI. The CCC viewed the TVC and considered the Advertiser’s response as well as opinion of Technical expert presented at the meeting. The CCC observed the cooler has considered a wattage of 40W and running time of 8 hours which gives a consumption of 0.32 KWh (unit of electricity consumed). At the rate of Rs 4 per unit (as an average) which comes to Rs 1.30 per day. The advertiser has submitted an in-house test report that shows a total power measurement of 39W. This is also accompanied by a video showing the experiment. Based on this opinion, the CCC concluded that the claim (in Hindi) as translated in English, “utilize electricity worth just Rs. 2 in the entire day”, was substantiated. The complaint was NOT UPHELD."

 

COMPANY: "Tslc Pte Ltd (Cash-e)"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“India’s first cash giving app”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek a personal hearing and submitted their written response. The CCC viewed the TVC and considered the Advertiser’s response. Advertiser states that the catch line “India’s first Cash Giving App” is derived from the fact that all loans disbursed and being disbursed by them are at “all India level” through “strictly app-based platform”; Whereas some of the mobile applications that were launched before CASHe are not completely app-based and hence CASHe is truly India’s first app-based cash giving mobile application. The CCC noted that what the advertiser is providing is “loan” and not “Cash” as would be commonly understood by a lay consumer post seeing the TVC. The CCC concluded that the claim, “cash giving app” in the context of the TVC is misleading by ambiguity and implication. The TVC contravened Chapter I.4 of the Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY: "Beltek Canadian Wayer Ltd"
PRODUCT:"Wild Vitamin Drink"

COMPLAINT:

"1. Wild Vitamin Water-A natural fruit flavoured drink with goodness of vitamins. 2. Low Sugar, 3. No Artificial Colour , 4. No Artificial Flavour, 5. No Artificial Sweetener."

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"On receiving the CCC’s recommendation, the advertiser requested for a Review of the CCC recommendations. The advertiser representatives did not seek a personal hearing and submitted their response for Review. As claim support data, the Advertiser provided an undertaking from the manufacturer that they are using Cane Sugar and no artificial sweetener, not adding any preservative in the drink, and an undertaking from their USA supplier that the colours used in the drink are natural juice colours, flavours used are natural flavours and not artificial or synthetic flavours. Advertiser states that the drink has low sugar as most of the beverages sold in the country have 2 to 3 times sugar content than other beverages. The claim support data was reviewed by the technical expert of ASCI. The CCC viewed the print advertisement, referred the product samples and considered the Advertiser’s response as well as opinion of the Technical expert presented at the meeting. Based on the expert opinion, the CCC concluded that claims of “No artificial colour"" , ""No artificial flavour"" , “No Artificial sweetener” were substantiated. These complaints were Not Upheld on Review. The CCC noted that the label declarations indicate presence of various vitamins in the products in variable RDA levels (Vit C, B3, B5, B6, B12). The claim, “A natural fruit flavoured drink with goodness of vitamins”, was substantiated. This complaint is Not Upheld on Review. The CCC noted that the product has significant amount of sugar. The CCC did not agree with the advertiser’s assertion that most of the beverages in the industry contain more than 10 gm of sugar per 100 ml as this was not substantiated. The claim “low sugar” was misleading by ambiguity. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the Code. This CCC RECOMMENDATION of complaint being Upheld stands on Review."

 

COMPANY:"Beltek Canadian Wayer Ltd"
PRODUCT:"Wild Vitamin Sparkle"

COMPLAINT:

“No Artificial Colour”, “No Artificial Flavour”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: NOT UPHELD

"On receiving the CCC’s recommendation, the advertiser requested for a Review of the CCC recommendations. As claim support data, the Advertiser provided an undertaking from their USA supplier that the flavours used in the drink are natural flavours and not artificial or synthetic flavours and that the products are colourless. The claim support data was reviewed by the technical expert of ASCI. The CCC viewed the print advertisement, referred the product samples and considered the Advertiser’s response as well as opinion of the Technical expert presented at the meeting. Based on the data submitted, the CCC concluded that the claim, “No artificial colour” and “No artificial flavour” were substantiated. This complaint is Not Upheld on Review."

 

COMPANY: "Vishnu Pouch Packaging Pvt. Ltd"
PRODUCT:"Vimal Elaichi"

COMPLAINT:

“Vimal Elaichi Daane Daane Mein Kesar Ka Dum”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"Complaint no.1 The TVC features Ajay Devgn. He is shown as eating Vimal Elaichi and then he rides a horse with a lady sitting behind him with kesar all around them. In the voice over he says, Vimal Elaichi Daane Daane Mein Kesar Ka Dum Our objections: This is a clear case of surrogate advertising. Vimal Pan Masala is a pan masala. Vimal pan masala has been advertised heavily for a long time and thus it has a very strong recall value among the viewers. Now, after ASCIs decision asking the advertisers to withdraw the ad, the advertisers continue to capture the audiences attention with just a small change in product name Vimal Elaichi. The TVC would contravene the ASCI Guidelines for Brand Extension product or service. It is shocking that Ajay Devgn is repeatedly endorsing a brand closely linked to a product known to be harmful to health. Action to be taken: Suspension Pending Investigation We propose that ASCI should direct the advertiser/the advertising agency/the media buying agency and the media concerned to suspend the advertisement, pending investigation.” Complaint no.2 “I am an NRI from UK who is a trainee with an advertising firm in India. I was working on aanti- pan masala social campaign and as a part of my research, happened to see an ad on IPL which my colleagues told me starred starring Ajay Devgn, the star who was awarded the Padma Shri recently by President Pranab Mukherjee for being a responsible actor and an Indian. I was amazed when I saw on youtube that Mr. Devgn also does an ad for ""Vimal Pan Masala"" which is a product that causes cancer. I visited Tata memorial hospital and saw cases of people who eat pan masala/tobacco and was shocked at the results. I believe from articles on net that lots a people objected to the ad and hence ajay does the next best thing, he does an ad for ""Vimal Elaichi (cardamom)"" which uses the same tagline as the pan masala ad ""Daane Daane Mein Kesar (Saffron) Ka dum"". Do people like Devgn feel that indians are fools? A Padma Shri award winner has no qualms in endorsing a harmful and fantasy ad. I hope ASCI and ministry of health pulls this ad off as people like me have understood that ""Vimal Elaichi"" is a surrogate for Pan Masala. I went with my friends to quite a few pan shops in delhi to look for vimal elaichi but was told that vimal elaichi doesn’t exist in reality. I was shocked and saw the ad again in IPL and would like to know how much content of Kesar/saffron has in a ""Vimal Elaichi"" pack of 170 mgm that an entire river of saffron and huge roman pillars of saffron get made when Ajay throws a bit of saffron in the water. That 170mgms of elaichi pouch must be having several hundred tonnes of saffron worth billions in it to make a river and pillars of saffron. Hero Heroine run away happily on a horse. Poor horse, had to carry both the actors weight through a bridge of saffron? Why hasn’t PETA filed a case against the manufacturer and the artistes? Why hasn't ASCI/ Ministry stopped/banned such a ridiculous ad which is misleading people into believing that a Rs.1/- pouch contains hundreds of rupees of saffron. This ad of fantasy will be misleading millions of innocents to buy Rs.1/- thinking that they are getting Rs.1000/- worth of saffron in Rs.1/- You should ask the manufacturer, how much of saffron is there in such a small pouch ? ASCI should take action not only against the client, the advertising agency as well as the Padma Shri winner Mr. Devgn in short ban the ad asap so that clients learn a lesson not to mislead poor innocents and especially surrogate ads for pan masala and alcohol."

Recommendation: UPHELD

"On receiving the CCC’s recommendation, the advertiser requested for a Review of the CCC recommendations. The advertiser representatives were given personal hearing by ASCI, at which time they submitted their response for Review. Advertiser argues that their product is promoted as elaichi and does not contain any such substance whose promotion or advertising is prohibited under law. The product Elaichi is not a mere brand extension of Pan Masala at a smaller scale but an independent major streamlined product with and the product sales crossing Rs. 2 crore mark in 4.5 months. As claim support data, the advertiser provided CA certified copy of the sales turnover of Vimal Elaichi, VAT registration, FSSAI license, Vimal Elaichi pack, etc. The advertiser informed ASCI during the personal hearing that the product is currently being sold only in Gujarat. The CCC viewed the TVCs and product packs of both the products - Vimal Pan Masala and Vimal Elaichi and considered the Advertiser’s response for Review. The CCC observed that the product packaging of both the products resembles each other, the TVC of Elaichi product continues to have the same tag-line that was promoted earlier by the same celebrity protagonist (Ajay Devgan) for the Pan Masala product. While the product is available for sale only in one state, the TVC is not restricted to Gujarat alone. Also the scale of advertising of the Elaichi product is disproportionate to the quantities being sold. The CCC concluded that the Vimal Elaichi advertisement is misleading by implication and contravened Chapters I.4 and III.6(b) of the ASCI Code (“Whether there exists in the advertisement under complaint any direct or indirect clues or cues which could suggest to consumers that it is a direct or indirect advertisement for the product whose advertising is restricted by this Code.) Also, the Ad did not meet the requirements as per ASCI's Guidelines for Qualification of Brand Extension Product or Service and thereby contravened Chapter III.6 (a) of the ASCI Code (“Whether the unrestricted product which is purportedly sought to be promoted through the advertisement under the complaint is produced and distributed in reasonable quantities, having regard to the scale of the advertising in question, the media used and the markets targeted.”). The CCC RECOMMENDATION of complaints being Upheld stand on Review. "

 

COMPANY:"Videocon Industries Ltd"
PRODUCT:"Videocon Titanium Refrigerator"

COMPLAINT:

“"1. “Saves electricity” 2. “Minus 30 degrees temperature” 3. “Worlds only refrigerator with a deep freezer”"”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"Appeared - On various channels including Manorama News on 17 April 2016 Language: English Description of the TVC: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NWb9oTu-0N4 TVC shows woman adding oil to food as dressing: words appear on screen -Touch to Delight. She touches a digital panel button- Touch to preserve. She applies lipstick- Touch to dazzle. Lipstick is kept in fridge- Touch to maintain. Family is leaving for a vacation and woman comes back into the house and touches digital panel -vacation mode of fridge- Touch to save electricity. Ad shows different compartments of the refrigerator. Then it shows a digital panel with -30 degree temperature shown alongside. Voice-over Worlds only refrigerator with a deep freezer. Picture of 6 fridges with different capacity. Claims: 1. Saves electricity 2. Minus 30 degrees temperature 3. Worlds only refrigerator with a deep freezer Our objections: 1. Claims 1 and 2 should be substantiated with independent scientific studies. 2. Claims 1 and 2 should be certified by competent independent authority. 3. How does Videocon claim that it is the –Worlds only refrigerator with deep freezer. Is it substantiated with data from independent studies 4. How does it claim that the technology and feature is unique to this product. Is it not available in similar products of other brands. Action to be taken: We propose that the advertisement should be immediately withdrawn."

Recommendation: UPHELD

""The ASCI had approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. In the absence of their response prior to the due date, the matter was examined by the CCC on the basis of the materials available then and the complaint was Upheld. On receiving the CCC’s recommendation, the advertiser representatives submitted their written response and this was taken up as a Review of the CCC recommendation. Advertiser submitted lab reports as evidence to show that the temperature levels in the Videocon Titanium refrigerators is sustainable at -30 degrees Celsius and that in case of choosing energy saving and vacation modes, the energy in the form of electricity is saved by almost 18-20%. The Advertiser also submitted a comparative chart showing the minimum temperatures offered by other brands for domestic refrigerators. The claim support data was reviewed by the technical expert of ASCI. The CCC viewed the TVC, considered the Advertiser’s response as well as opinion of the Technical expert presented at the meeting. The CCC concluded that claims “Minus 30 degrees C temperature” and “Saves Electricity” for ""Energy Saving"" mode and ""Vacation"" mode were substantiated. This complaint is NOT UPHELD on Review. Claim - “World's only refrigerator with a deep freezer” The CCC noted that there is no universally accepted or trade-specific definition of deep freezer. The advertiser’s refrigerator freezer section does provide a temperature of minus 30 degrees C, which is better (lower) than some other brands sold in India (as per market data provided by the advertiser). However, there being other brands having deep freezer temperature close to that of the advertised product, it is not conclusively proven that the advertised product is the “World’s only” refrigerator with a deep freezer. The claim, ""World's only refrigerator with a deep freezer"" was not substantiated and is misleading by exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the Code. This complaint being Upheld stands on Review.""

 

COMPANY:"Videocon Industries Ltd"
PRODUCT:"Videocon Air Conditioners"

COMPLAINT:

"1. India’s widest range of air-conditioners. 2. More than 500 models to choose from. 3. 5 year comprehensive warranty. 4. 100 percent copper condenser. 5. Vitamin C filter. 6. Active carbon filter. 7. Gold fin evaporator. 8. Auto clean -blow function. "

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"Our objections - 1. How does Videocon claims Indias widest range of air conditioners, It needs to be substantiated with independent research data. 2. What is meant by auro clean. Is is unique to this brand,if not then it is misleading by omission. 3. What is meant by Vitamin C filter, active carbon filter, gold fin evaporator. What role they play to better the performance of AC. this needs to be explained. It is certified by competent authority. Is the technology unique to this brand. 4. Claims 1-8 needs to be substantiated with independent research data. Action to be taken - We propose the advertisement should be immediately withdrawn.” "

Recommendation: UPHELD

""The ASCI had approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. In the absence of their response prior to the due date, the matter was examined by the CCC on the basis of the materials available then and the complaint was Upheld. On receiving the CCC’s recommendation, the advertiser representatives did not seek a personal hearing but submitted their written response and this was taken up as a Review of the CCC recommendation. The claim support data was reviewed by the technical expert of ASCI. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response as well as opinion of the Technical expert presented at the meeting. Based on the opinion, the CCC concluded that – Claim - “India's widest range of air-conditioners” Advertiser provided compilation of web-search of the range of models from their own and from other manufacturer's websites to substantiate this claim. It shows that they have > 500 variants whereas others surveyed have substantially less. In absence of any data contrary to this submission, the claim, “India’s widest range of air conditioners”, was considered acceptable. This complaint is Not Upheld on Review. Claim – “More than 500 models to choose from” The advertiser provided data to indicate that they have > 500 ""models"" wherein a choice of colour of the unit was treated as a different ""model"". The CCC noted that the term “model” implies that one model differs from another in terms of technology and/or design. However, different colour, per se, can not be considered as a differentiator for “model”. Same model in different colour would be considered as a “colour variant”. Hence counting such variants as models is incorrect. The claim, “More than 500 models to choose from”, is misleading by ambiguity and exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the Code. This complaint being Upheld stands on Review. Claim – “5-year comprehensive warranty” The CCC observed that the warranty card states coverage of 1 year plus 4 year extended warranty. Moreover, the warranty has exclusions like gas refilling and plastic parts not being included. In view of the exclusions being integral parts of the device for its function and use, the warranty cannot claim to be a ""comprehensive"" warranty; at best it is an ordinary warranty with exclusions. The claim, “5-year comprehensive warranty” was not substantiated and is misleading by exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the Code. This complaint being Upheld stands on Review. Claim – “100 percent copper condenser” Advertiser provided a statement vouching to the effect that the condenser tubes are copper but the pin-fins are aluminum. In so far as the tubes plus aluminium pin-fins together form the condenser, the claim of “100% copper condenser” is false and is misleading. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the Code. This complaint being Upheld stands on Review. Claim – “Vitamin C filter” Advertiser provided a test report for presence of Vitamin C in a fabric that the advertiser claims are placed as a bag inside the AC. A purchase invoice for such a filter material from a supplier was also submitted. As the Advertiser is only claiming the presence of vitamin C and not claiming any benefits, the CCC considered the claim, “Vitamin C filter”, to be substantiated. This complaint is Not Upheld on Review. Claim – “Active carbon filter” Advertiser provided a purchase invoice for a carbon coated fabric containing silver that activates the fabric for microbial control. This fabric is placed as a bag inside the AC. As the advertiser is only claiming its presence and not claiming any benefit , the considered the claim “active carbon filter” to be substantiated. This complaint is Not Upheld on Review. Claim – “Gold fin evaporator” No substantiation of the gold part of this claim was provided. The claim of “Gold fin evaporator” was not substantiated and is misleading. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the Code. This complaint being Upheld stands on Review. Claim – “Auto clean (blow function)” The advertiser asserts that the device feature helps in evaporating the moisture condensed on the evaporator coils of the indoor unit and prevents dust accumulation on the wet evaporator coils. However the advertiser did not provide any data to demonstrate this function actually does an “auto-clean” of the coils. The claim of “Auto clean” was not substantiated adequately and is misleading. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the Code. This complaint being Upheld stands on Review. " "

 

COMPANY:"Pretti Slim Clinic"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"1. Lose Belly Fat And Become Fit 2. Mumbai's No 1 slimming clinic "

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI had approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. In the absence of their response prior to the due date, the matter was examined by the CCC on the basis of the materials available then and the complaint was Upheld. On receiving the CCC’s recommendation, the advertiser representatives did not seek a personal hearing and submitted their written response which was considered to review the CCC recommendations. As claim support data, the advertiser provided links to various news articles, Copy of the awards and certificates by Economic Times – the Best Healthcare Brands 2016, and the KAF Business and Entertainment Global award, and Technical Information about U-Lipo. The claim support data was reviewed by the technical expert of ASCI. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response as well as opinion of the Technical expert presented at the meeting. The CCC noted that the ET Best Healthcare Brands 2016 award referred to the award category as “Bariatric” and not slimming. The KAF Award for being the “Best slimming clinic in Mumbai” being referred to, is given by an individual who is a Cine and TV artist. It invites participants to register under specific category of awards and the award is given to one of the registered participants. Hence, the eligibility criteria for the award may exclude many other institutes in the same category if they did not register for the same. Also, the criteria for the choice of this award, details of all other institutes that participated and the selection process were not submitted by the advertiser. The claim, “Mumbai's No 1 slimming clinic”, was not adequately substantiated with comparative data versus other similar clinics and criteria for selection. Specific to the claim of “Lose belly fat and become fit”, the CCC noted that while some fat loss may be possible with treatments, fitness is achieved by other means such as healthy lifestyle and exercise regimens etc. The CCC concluded that the claim, “Lose Belly Fat And Become Fit”, was not substantiated with clinical evidence for the services being offered. The claims as well as the visual in the advertisement – particularly of the male model shown in a trouser that is very loose at the waist, implying a significant weight loss, is also misleading. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The CCC RECOMMENDATION of complaint being Upheld stands on Review. "

 

COMPANY: "Tata Sky Limited "
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"My 99 pack is advertised prominently as Rs. 99 pack. But when you want to subscribe they point out fine print that you need to take at least one add-on of at least Rs. 35/-. This is therefore misleading only to make customers come to website, and make them not compare the choices logically.In my case, when I talked to customer executive, he made me add Rs. 99 first without disclosing the facts, and I complied. But I don't think it is your perview. 1. Screenshot, which appears on clicking ""My 99"", and then using scrollbar to go to very bottom. See the ""disclaimer"" section, and a line there about additional requirement for ""My 99"" package. 2. PDF file of the full page where the packages are listed. Here, again, check out the disclaimer section towards the end of the page, in which you will find following statement. ""Minimum monthly subscription for chosen DTH packages or individual channels cannot be less than Rs 165"" (In addition, the call center will actually give you this information. You should accept the recorded call center conversation as another source of valid proof in future.) "

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek a personal hearing and submitted their written response. The CCC viewed the website advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response. Advertiser argues that the information provided on the Tata Sky Website is not in the nature of advertising but information on the services provided by Tata Sky. As per the CCC, ASCI Code's definition of Advertising states that ""Any communication which in the normal course would be recognised as an advertisement by the general public would be included in this definition even if it is carried free-ofcharge for any reason."" Therefore, promotion of product or services via Website, too, is considered as Advertising and in ASCI’s purview. The CCC noted that the product pack is being advertised as My 99; however, the consumer can not avail the same at Rs 99 as it is necessary for him to buy Add on pack. The CCC concluded that the claim, “My 99 - Rs.99 per month” is misleading by ambiguity. The website advertisement contravened Chapter I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY: "Pearl Academy "
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"The advertisement calls for admission into various courses including 'Interior Architecture'. As per the Architects Act 1972, the use of name and style of Architect is governed by rules formulated by the Council of Architecture (CoA), New Delhi. As the course is not approved by CoA (list of approved courses given at https://www.coa.gov.in/show_img. php?fid=203) and as it is not affiliated from any UGC approved university (refer http://pearlacademy. com/bahonours- courses/interior-architecture-anddesign/), the use of Architect or Architecture or Interior Architecture is wrong as per the Architects Act 1972. Therefore, the advertisement published on page 110 of Times of India (Delhi edition) dated 27.07.2016 is misleading and illegal. "

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek a personal hearing and submitted their written response. The CCC viewed the website advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response. Advertiser states that none of the provisions of the Architect’s Act are applicable to the courses offered by them as their courses are not recognized nor have they applied for recognition of any of their courses by Council of Architecture (COA). Advertiser argues that during admission process, there is detailed disclosure to potential students that said course would not have any connotation or qualification so of an Architect under the Architects Act, 1972. The CCC noted that the advertisement is of a certificate course only; however, it makes a reference UG, PG and Diploma programs. The CCC concluded that the claim, “Admissions open for UG, PG and Diploma Programs” and reference to Interior Architecture, is misleading by ambiguity and implication as UG and PG courses cannot happen without certification and affiliation to any University. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapter I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY: "Hindustan Unilever Ltd"
PRODUCT:"Ponds Men Pollution Control Face Wash"

COMPLAINT:

"1. Advanced Ponds Men Pollution out Facewash 2. Contains activated micro charcoal 3. 1000 X adsorption power 4. Removes even small micro particles 5. Face instantly bright and fully energized "

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"“Celebrity actor Varun Dhawan is shown walking through dusty polluted area. Voice says that you cannot wash pollution as small invisible micro pollution particles go deep in your skin making you look dull and tired. Ponds Men Pollution out Facewash has activated micro charcoal with 1000X adsorption power that pulls out micropollution from deep within the skin pores to give you bright and energized skin.” Our objections: 1. Claim 1 to 5 need to be substantiated by independent studies and research data 2. What is meant by advanced. How are the advertisers claiming it to be advanced. 3. Claim 3 needs to be substantiated and certified by competent authority. 1000X adsorption power compared to what. What are the parameters for comparison. Please explain. 4. What is meant by energized skin. Please explain. 5. Why is the product specifically for men. How is it different from similar products for women. "

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek a personal hearing and submitted their written response. The CCC viewed the TVC and considered the Advertiser’s response. As claim support data, the advertiser provided copies of consumer studies conducted on males, Technical reports regarding particle size of the Activated “micro” Charcoal, references regarding it’s adsorption properties etc. The claim support data was reviewed by the technical expert of ASCI. The CCC viewed the TVC and considered the Advertiser’s response as well as opinion of the Technical expert presented at the meeting. Advertiser mentions that the additional ingredients such as activated charcoal, exfoliating silica scrub particles, coffee bean extract and menthol used along with the soap is their 'Advanced formula'. The advertiser supports the presence of activated charcoal of 10 micron particle size having 1000 times adsorptive power than the normal charcoal. The face wash is for men due to addition of specific perfumes and additives as per the male perception and the cleansing efficacy is substantiated based on technical tests. Based on the data presented, the CCC concluded that the claims, “Advanced Ponds Men Pollution out Facewash”, “Contains activated micro charcoal”, “1000 X adsorption power”, “Removes even small micro particles”, “Face instantly bright and fully energized”, were substantiated. This complaint was NOT UPHELD. However, for the claim “1000 X adsorption power”, the advertisement is misleading by omission of the mention of the basis of comparison. The CCC concluded that the TVC contravened Chapter I.4 of the ASCI Code. This complaint was UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY: "ICICI Bank Ltd "
PRODUCT:"Coral Credit Card"

COMPLAINT:

"2 complimentary movies every month under the Buy One Get One offer through www.bookmyshow.com. The Bank has a very limited all India level quota system for availing this offer, and has millions of cards in circulation. The promotion makes me believe I will be able to get 2 free tickets every month, however I'm never able to claim the offer. Even ifI try the very second the quota is supposed to refresh, I still get an error stating quota is consumed. ICICI cannot give a few hundred free tickets between millions of card users and state that everyone will get 2 free tickets"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The Advertiser representatives sought a Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat and submitted their written response. The CCC viewed the website advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response. Advertiser states that through the Bookmyshow program, a significant number of customers have availed free tickets every month and as claim support data, the advertiser shared the details of such customers. The advertiser submitted screenshot of their web-site that provides the criteria for availing the advertised offer i.e. ‘successful booking is on first-come-first-serve basis and is subject to daily stock availability’. The CCC concluded that while the claim offer, ""2 complimentary movies every month under the Buy One Get One offer through www.bookmyshow.com.”, was substantiated, the claim is misleading by omission of the qualifying criteria in the same web-page. The website advertisement contravened Chapter I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY: "Simla Chemicals Pvt.Ltd"
PRODUCT:"Simco Herbal Shampoo"

COMPLAINT:

"1. “5 Problem solver- Falling hair, dandruff, weak roots, premature graying, dull and lifeless hair” 2. “Herbal Shampoo with extra Conditioner” 3. “Herbal shampoo for your all hair needs” 4. “Hair expert since 1948” "

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"“Appeared-TVC appeared on India TV on 4 Aug 2016 You tube link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PhOulLkyPKw Language-Hindi Description : Ad shows celebrity actress Esha Deol moving her head and waving her hair. Voiceover talks about her beautiful hair. Claims that Simco Herbal Shampoo has been your hair expert since 1948, still is and will always be. Various written claims shown on screen while TVC is playing. Claims: 1. 5 Problem solver- Falling hair, dandruff, weak roots, premature graying, dull and lifeless hair 2. Herbal Shampoo with extra Conditioner 3. Herbal shampoo for your all hair needs 4. Hair expert since 1948 Our objections: 1. Claim 1 to 3 need to be substantiated by independent studies and research data 2. How does Simco claim to solve the 5 hair problems, as they may also be caused by diet Issues and lifestyle? 3. How are the advertisers claiming it is with extra conditioner. Extra to what, compared to what. Please explain and substantiate. 4. How does Simco claim to be a Hair expert. Action to be taken: We propose that the advertisement should be immediately withdrawn. "

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The CCC viewed the TVC and considered the Advertiser’s response. The CCC noted that the Advertiser did not submit any data and voluntarily agreed to withdraw the advertisement. In the absence of claim support data, the CCC concluded that the claims, “5 Problem solver- Falling hair, dandruff, weak roots, premature graying, dull and lifeless hair”, “Herbal Shampoo with extra Conditioner”, “Herbal shampoo for your all hair needs”, were not substantiated with evidence of product benefits. The claim, “Hair expert since 1948”, was not substantiated with supporting evidence. Also, these claims are misleading. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY: "SRM University "
PRODUCT:"Srm Institute Of Hotel Management"

COMPLAINT:

“India’s No. 1 Hotel Management College.”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek a personal hearing and submitted their written response. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response. Advertiser states that the various awards of excellence have led to the claim of being No.1. As claim support data, the advertiser provided references for each of the award, ASSOCHAM Award by HRD ministry, GHRDC Certification, Competition Success Review Award. The CCC noted that the support data shows that – First Rank is state / category specific i.e. in the State of Tamil Nadu (Private) and First Rank in the category of Super Excellence in the GHDRC (Global Human Resource Development Centre) Hotel Management Institute Survey 2016 or ASSOCHAM India Education National Excellence Awards 2016 as the “Best Institute in Hotel/Hospitality”. SRM Institute of Hotel Management has been conferred as the CSR (Competition Success Review) Top Hotel Management Institutes of India Award for the year 2016 and this data does not support “No.1” claim. Citation on 9th July 2015 is in recognition for the high standard of quality culinary education offered to their constituents and for contributing to the continued growth of the global hospitality and food service industries and the Certificate (support data) has not been dated. Also the data shows Welcomegroup Graduate School Of Hotel Admn., Manipal,Karntatka scoring more points (1199.98 Points) than SRM (1066.05 POINTS). The CCC concluded that the claim, “India’s No. 1 Hotel Management College”, was not conclusively proven with comparative data versus other similar institutes and is misleading by omission of the mention of exact criteria or categories. There is no disclaimer in the TVC giving the year, source and category for the awards received. The TVC contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1, I.2 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY: "Nexus Institute of Hotel Management"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“100% Job Placement”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response. Advertiser states that Nexus trains the boys for six months in cooking , service and housekeeping and then place the boys in local hotels of Belgaum. In the absence of any verifiable claim support data, the CCC concluded that the claim, “100% Job Placement”, was not substantiated, and is misleading by exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY: "Hindustan Air Academy"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“100% job”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek a personal hearing and submitted their written response post the due date through their Advocates. ASCI further requested the Advocate/advertiser to submit comprehensive response in support of the claims made, and provided them with an extension to submit this information. In the absence of any verifiable claim support data, the CCC concluded that the claim, “100% Job”, was not substantiated with authentic data such as detailed list of students who have been placed through their Institute, contact details of students for verification, enrolment forms and appointment letters received by the students, nor any independent audit or verification certificate, and is misleading by exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY: "Made Easy "
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“India's Best Institute for IES, GATE & PSUs”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response. The CCC noted that the advertiser did not provide evidence to show on what parameters they are claiming to be the best, and offered to modify their advertisement. In the absence of claim support data, the CCC concluded that the claim, “India's Best Institute for IES, GATE & PSUs”, was not substantiated with comparative data versus other similar institutes in the same category. Also, the claim is misleading by exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY:"Mahamaya Industrial Training Centre"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“100% Placement”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objection raised in the complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim, “100% Placement", was not substantiated with authentic supporting data such as detailed list of students who have been placed through their Institute, contact details of students for verification, enrolment forms and appointment letters received by the students, nor any independent audit or verification certificate. Also, the claim is misleading by exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY: "GT Group of Companies"
PRODUCT:"GT Infortech"

COMPLAINT:

"Job Guarantee"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek a personal hearing and submitted their written response through their Advocates. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the Advocate’s response. The advocate states that their client has not published the said advertisement and they are in the process of taking legal action against the concerned advertiser for misusing their logo. The CCC noted that the advertiser did not submit any evidence to prove that they have initiated any action against any institute misusing their logo or any communication with the concerned media for this matter. In the absence of claim support data, the CCC concluded that the claim, “Job Guarantee”, was not substantiated and the advertisement is misleading by exaggeration and implication that it is issued by GT Infotech. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY:"Anand International College of Engineering"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“No.1 Private Engineering College of Rajasthan”, and “This year Anand college has successfully placed 97% students seeking placement and is in the process of placing the remaining 93% students”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek a personal hearing and submitted their written response. ASCI further requested the advertiser to submit comprehensive response in support of the claims made, and provided them extension to submit this information. In the absence of any claim support data, the CCC concluded that the claim, “No.1 Private Engineering College of Rajasthan”, was not substantiated with comparative data versus other similar institutes in the same category or any third party validation or research to prove this claim. The claim, “This year Anand college has successfully placed 97% students seeking placement and is in the process of placing the remaining 93% students”, was not substantiated with authentic supporting data such as detailed list of students who have been placed through their Institute, contact details of students for verification, enrolment forms and appointment letters received by the students, nor any independent audit or verification certificate. Also, the claims are misleading by exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY:"PDM Religious & Education Association"
PRODUCT:"PDM Institute of Engineering & Technology"

COMPLAINT:

“100 Placements in 2016.”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek a personal hearing and submitted their written response. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response. Advertiser states that the figure ‘100’ in their advertisement only shows the number of students to whom they had provided the job opportunity through their Training & Placement Office i.e. one hundred placements and not “hundred percent placement”. ASCI further requested the advertiser to submit exhaustive response regarding the name and contact details of the students enrolled for independent verification and where they have been placed and provided them with an extension to submit this information. As claim support data, the advertiser provided list of 100+ students who participated in campus placement 2016. The CCC noted that the data only indicates students’s participation and does not prove successful placement. The CCC concluded that the claim, “100 Placements in 2016.”, was not substantiated with adequate data such as appointment letters received by the students nor any independent audit or verification certificate. Also, the claim is misleading by ambiguity and implication. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY:"Sankara Institute of Management Science"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“100% Placement Records”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek a personal hearing and submitted their written response. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response. Advertiser states that the total strength of 2016 passed out batch is 69, of this 69, 51 who had opted for placements, underwent placement training as per norms and all of them were placed. Based on these 51, they have mentioned 100% placements. Advertiser did not provide any supporting data for the claim made. The CCC concluded that the claim, “100% Placement Records”, was not substantiated with authentic data such as detailed list of students (for every year since the inception of the institute) who have been placed through their Institute, contact details of students for verification, enrolment forms and appointment letters received by the students, nor any independent audit or verification certificate. Also, the claim is misleading by exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY: "Uttaranchal Open University"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“100% Job Guarantee.”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response. Advertiser states that the said advertisement was published by their coordinator at the concerned study centre without their consent. In the absence of claim support data, the CCC concluded that the claim, “Job Guarantee”, was not substantiated and is misleading by exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY: "Manav Rachna Education Society"
PRODUCT:"Manav Rachna International University"

COMPLAINT:

“NAAC Accredited “A” Grade University & Professional Institutions.”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: NOT UPHELD

"The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response. As claim support data, the advertiser provided certificate of the accreditations from the University Grants Commission, New Delhi, Certificate of accreditation by the National Assessment and Accreditation Council (NMC) in 2011, Certificate of the accreditation by the National Assessment and Accreditation Council (NMC) in 2015. The claim support data was reviewed by the technical expert of ASCI. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response as well as opinion of the Technical expert presented at the meeting. The CCC noted that the institute has accreditation valid up to 2020. Based on this opinion, the CCC concluded that the claims, “NAAC Accredited “A” Grade University & Professional Institutions.”, were substantiated. The complaint was NOT UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY: "Avion Biotech "
PRODUCT:"K lor Free"

COMPLAINT:

“Controls the diabetes by increasing the production of insulin”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek a personal hearing and submitted their written response. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response. As claim support data, the advertiser provided literature references regarding Stevia. The CCC noted that these references were of animal studies and do not conclusively support the claimed benefits in humans. The CCC concluded that the claim (in Gujarathi), as translated in English, “Controls the diabetes by increasing the production of insulin”, was not substantiated with clinical evidence, and is misleading by exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY: "Chennais Amirta International Institute of Hotel Management"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“Gives employment before degree.”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser to seek their response to the objections raised regarding the claim in the advertisement. Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek a personal hearing and submitted their written response through their Advocates. The CCC viewed the TVC and considered the Advocates response. The Advertiser did not provide any supporting data for the claim made in the advertisement and stated that ASCI’s recommendations on their advertisement can not bear any consequences. In absence of any claim support data, the CCC concluded that the claim, “Gives employment before degree”, was not substantiated with relevant data (such as batch size of students per year, their enrolment forms, detailed list of students who have been placed through their Institute, contact details of students for independent verification, and appointment letters received by the students) nor any independent audit or verification certificate, and the claim is therefore misleading by gross exaggeration. The TVC contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY: "Dr. Dassan’s Ayurvedic Herbal"
PRODUCT:"Body Walk Oil"

COMPLAINT:

"1. More Active Part BODY WALK OIL and medicine penetrates deep in to the joints and helps produce cartilage and works on the pain from the roots. 2. Results in 20 Days or Money Back. 3. Now no need to change your Knee."

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek a personal hearing and submitted their written response. Advertiser states that the claims are based as per the Ayurvedic Shastras and properties of the Ayurvedic ingredients incorporated in BodyWalk Oil and also based on the consumer satisfaction records. As claim support data, the advertiser provided copy of shastras from where the references have been taken. The claim support data was reviewed by the technical expert of ASCI. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response as well as opinion of the Technical expert presented at the meeting. The CCC noted that the product is a patent and proprietary medicine with a mixture of different classical formulations of oils and additional ingredients and no product efficacy data or clinical evidence has been submitted. Consumer satisfaction records was not considered acceptable as conclusive claim support data. The CCC concluded that the claims (in Hindi) as translated in English, “More Active Part BODY WALK OIL and medicine penetrates deep in to the joints and helps produce cartilage and works on the pain from the roots”, “Now no need to change your Knee”, “Results in 20 Days or Money Back”, were not substantiated with clinical evidence of product efficacy. Also, the claims are misleading by exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY: "Dr. Rana’s Health Care"
PRODUCT:"Gaino Power Powder"

COMPLAINT:

"1. We will give you Freedom from Thin Body 2. Tested on more and more people 3. Shows immediate effect "

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response. The advertiser acknowledged that the advertisement was given by mistake and they have taken action against one their employee. The CCC concluded that the claims (in Hindi), as translated in English, “We will give you Freedom from Thin Body”, “Tested on more and more people”, “Shows immediate effect”, were not substantiated and are misleading by exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY: "Cadila Healthcare Ltd"
PRODUCT:"Zydus Acti Life"

COMPLAINT:

"1. Cholesterol Control 2. Specially formulated with pre-biotic anti-fibres to reduce the cholesterol. "

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The advertiser was granted an extension to the standard lead time to submit their reply, in response to their request. The advertiser representatives did not seek a personal hearing and submitted their written response. Advertiser states that Actilife contains prebiotic fibres and is also fortified with essential vitamins and minerals that are beneficial for adults for whom this product has been formulated and developed. The key ingredient of the product is Fructo Oligosaccharides (FOS), a well-known prebiotic. As claim support data, the advertiser provided extracts of articles published in various journals on FOS. The claim support data was reviewed by the technical expert of ASCI. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response as well as opinion of the Technical expert presented at the meeting. The CCC noted that a number of factors determine cholesterol development in human body. While the literature references indicate potential benefits of dietary FOS, to claim that the advertised product “controls or reduces cholesterol”, clinical evidence of product efficacy is required. These are required to prove benefit of FOS at the levels and dosage for the advertised product; However, this claim support was not available. While the product is formulated with Prebiotic, there is no evidence to prove that Actilife enriched with prebiotics helps in cholesterol management as claimed. The CCC concluded that the claims, “Cholesterol Control” and “…to reduce the cholesterol”, were not substantiated, and are misleading. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY: "N.I Education Trust"
PRODUCT:"NIMS Blacumin Tea"

COMPLAINT:

"1. Blacumin, a solution to every disease, now in tea powder. 2. We can consume Blacumin, which is Natural Immunisation Improve, In The Form of Nims Blacumin Tea. 3. Make Nims Tea your habit. 4. Stay away from Diseases. "

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek a personal hearing and submitted their written response. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response. Advertiser states that Blackcumin (Nigella sativa) and its combination with Tea is not hazardous to human but a safe natural plant product with numerous health benefits. As claim support data, the advertiser provided extracts of published articles on Nigella sativa. The CCC noted that the advertiser asserts product benefits however, did not provide any evidence of efficacy of the advertised product. The CCC concluded that the claims (in Malayalam), as translated in English, “Blacumin, a solution to every disease, now in tea powder”, “We can consume Blacumin, which is Natural Immunisation Improve, in the form of Nims Blacumin Tea”, “Make Nims Tea your habit”, “Stay away from Diseases”, were not substantiated and are misleading by exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY: "Faasos Food Services Pvt. Ltd"
PRODUCT:"Faasos"

COMPLAINT:

“Faaso's have introduced Daily Offers which says on each day of the week there is a particular offer on their product line "Faaso's Finest". Some offers include buy one get one free, buy two get two free, 50% off, 60% cash back etc. Faaso's Finest products are priced from Rs.119 but are under Rs 300 ex. vat. They have mentioned about this faaso's finest offer on the app and on the pamphlets, these products are marked with a star badge on both the advertisement medias I tried to order a product from " Faaso's Finest " product line using their app, but the order was not able proceed. When called the faaso's chinchwad outlet and asked why, they answered me that the minimum order amount to avail faaso's finest offers is 300. As there is not a single product that are above 300, buy one get one free is misleading. Also they have not mentioned about the minimum order amount of 300 in their pamphlets or the faaso's app. I want this clarified and hope my complaint won't go unnoticed. Thank you.”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: NOT UPHELD

"The CCC viewed the Ad – promotional material and considered the Advertiser’s response. Advertiser states that the offer needs two products in a cart for applying the coupon successfully but the Customer will be charged for only one product and the other (lowest of the two) will be given free of cost. The CCC concluded that the claim offer of “Buy 1 Get 1 Free” is not misleading and it indicates that the cheaper one will be given free. The complaint was NOT UPHELD. "

 
 

 

Complaint to
WhatsApp
DID YOU KNOW?

Developed by Wishtree Technologies LLP